Fixing our Broken Society

Here's an excerpt from the leader of the opposition in Britain, and the key thrust of his speech is responsibility, and responsibility isn't a one-way street.

We as a society have been far too sensitive. In order to avoid injury to people's feelings, in order to avoid appearing judgemental, we have failed to say what needs to be said. We have seen a decades-long erosion of responsibility, of social virtue, of self-discipline, respect for others, deferring gratification instead of instant gratification.

Instead we prefer moral neutrality, a refusal to make judgments about what is good and bad behaviour, right and wrong behaviour. Bad. Good. Right. Wrong. These are words that our political system and our public sector scarcely dare use any more.

Of course as soon as a politician says this there is a clamour - "but what about all of you?" And let me say now, yes, we are human, flawed and frequently screw up.

Our relationships crack up, our marriages break down, we fail as parents and as citizens just like everyone else. But if the result of this is a stultifying silence about things that really matter, we re-double the failure. Refusing to use these words - right and wrong - means a denial of personal responsibility and the concept of a moral choice.

We talk about people being "at risk of obesity" instead of talking about people who eat too much and take too little exercise. We talk about people being at risk of poverty, or social exclusion: it's as if these things - obesity, alcohol abuse, drug addiction - are purely external events like a plague or bad weather.

Of course, circumstances - where you are born, your neighbourhood, your school, and the choices your parents make - have a huge impact. But social problems are often the consequence of the choices that people make.

There is a danger of becoming quite literally a de-moralised society, where nobody will tell the truth anymore about what is good and bad, right and wrong. That is why children are growing up without boundaries, thinking they can do as they please, and why no adult will intervene to stop them - including, often, their parents. If we are going to get any where near solving some of these problems, that has to stop.

And why would a different government be any different? Not least because we understand that the causes of our broken society lie not just in government policies but in our national culture.

Changing our culture is not easy or quick. You cannot pull a lever. You cannot do it top-down. But you can give a lead. You can give a nudge. You can make a difference if you are clear where you stand.

Imagine if there was a Government that understood, really understood, that encouraging personal and social responsibility must be the cornerstone of everything that it did and that every move it took re-inforced that view.

Saying to parents, your responsibility and your commitment matters, so we will give a tax break for marriage and end the couple penalty. Saying to head teachers you are responsible and if you want enforceable home school contracts and the freedom to exclude you can have it and we will judge you on your results. Saying to police officers you are responsible and the targets and bureaucracy are going but you must account to an elected individual who will want answers if you fail. Saying to business, if you take responsibility you can help change culture and we will help you with deregulation and tax cuts … but in the long run they depend on the steps you take to help tackle the costs of social failure that have driven your costs up and up.

It is the responsibility agenda and it will be the defining thread of any government I lead. [..]

Above all, I believe that this cultural change needs to start at home. The values we need to repair our broken society and to build a strong society are values that should be taught in the home, in the family.

That is why I have put the family right at the heart of my programme. Action on knife crime. Better policing and criminal justice reform. Reforming schools. Reforming welfare. These are all vital components of the social reform we need so urgently.

But in the end, the state cannot do it all. In the end, the best regulation is self-regulation, not state regulation. That's why the family comes first. That's where we can really turn things around and start to repair our broken society.
[Full speech]

~~~~

... a dangerous idea, that almost makes sense ...

Thursday night, our netball game was halted with the news of multiple bombings in London, news which has dominated the newspapers and television since. Time to reflect on the issue I suspect. I have been reading a number of the editorial pieces and speeches following the bombing.

I was really struck by this piece spoken by the Mayor of London (Ken Livingstone).

This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful. It was not aimed at Presidents or Prime Ministers. It was aimed at ordinary, working-class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old. It was an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter, irrespective of any considerations for age, for class, for religion, or whatever …

[And to the terrorists]:

I know that you personally do not fear giving up your own life in order to take others - that is why you are so dangerous. But I know you fear that you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society and I can show you why you will fail.

In the days that follow look at our airports, look at our sea ports and look at our railway stations and, even after your cowardly attack, you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world will arrive in London to become Londoners and to fulfill their dreams and achieve their potential.

They choose to come to London, as so many have come before because they come to be free, they come to live the life they choose, they come to be able to be themselves. They flee you because you tell them how they should live. They don't want that and nothing you do, however many of us you kill, will stop that flight to our city where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another. Whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail."

The War against Terror is not a conventional war. The combatants are not nations, the victims are not solely the powerful; the desired outcome is the creation of fear amongst the public. Terrorism is a battle of hearts and minds, causalities increasing not decreasing resolve. It is not a war that can be won. It’s a blind love, and faith in their ideology that wills the combatants to fight, even to the point of giving their lives; a blind resolve compelling Westerners to return to work using the tube the following day.

But we do need to seek to understand the mind and motivation of the terrorist, what is causing them to pursue this course of action (not ever condoning their action).

The war on terrorism will be won when our ideology overcomes theirs. It’s a trifle ironic that the day the bombs went off in London the G8 were discussing plans to increase aid to Africa. This is the ideology that we would seek to prevail.

Perhaps another thing that I’ve noticed this time is the number of Islamic voices condemning the terrorist bombings, and saying the ideology of hate has no place in either their religion or society. I hear too many Christian voices now saying that this is part of their religion (as it should be practiced). We need to understand each other, maintain a dialogue between the West, and the ideology. I find it a trifle ironic, that a nation that prides itself on being a democracy would seek to force other nations to be democratic.

I think there is a complex interplay of factors in the production of terrorists. I think it is clear that the War on Terror is producing terrorists, poverty, and also ‘lack of liberties’ have also been talked about as causes. I don’t think liberty and democracy are necessarily ‘inoculations’ against terrorism. But I would be interesting to read information speaking on the link between economic development, democratic ideology, and religion.