Guardian UK: We're not all middle class now

[marmar]

We're not all middle class now
It's time society respected the values of the working class and the contribution they have made to this country

Chris Trude
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 14 December 2008 10.00 GMT


For a very long time class prejudice has been the acceptable means of active discrimination within British society, but it has been consistently ignored as a subject worthy of discussion, disregarded by liberals and the left alike. Middle-class intellectuals have betrayed the hard-won legacy of the workers' struggles during the 1960s by refusing to create a strong representative voice for the working class in the democratic structures of the country. Instead, they have divided them into sheep and goats through the focus on gender- and ethnicity-targeting that has mainly benefited the already educated and affluent. Politicians have routinely used this emphasis on selected causes as a fiscally convenient mask to cover their inability to implement a policy of improved rights and conditions for the whole population.

At the core of this discrimination is the age-old prejudice around manual workers earning money with their hands and intellectuals with their brains. Intellect and intelligence are not the same thing and fortunately most human dilemmas can be addressed with intelligence. However, as a society we have adopted the intellectual approach as the only solution while dismissing the intelligence and pragmatism that is the wellspring of working-class life. Tony Blair understood this dichotomy, hence his fight with socialist intellectuals weeping a rose-tinted tear over losing Clause IV and the line "workers of hand or brain".

The media are also complicit in this prejudice with an unending promotion of middle-class attributes and aspirations, while at the same time daily demonising the working class as feral, racist, homophobic, sexist and ignorant. Class prejudice is politically and socially acceptable in the corridors of power in both the public and private sphere and even in the House of Commons. The working class is made to feel that they count for nothing. It is insultingly ironic that we are labelled as "chavs", the Romany word for child.

More than 70% of the UK population are not middle class and many have not been anywhere near a university but undoubtedly they make a substantial contribution to the fabric and functioning of our society in the realm of public service and commercial enterprise. Many have the blend of knowledge, experience and intelligence that is desperately needed to bring clarity and common sense into our decision-making processes. The working class is alienated from the political process and many believe that everything that has been done for them, has actually been done to them. They are not afforded a voice or the means and infrastructure to allow them the same self-determination that the middle class take for granted. When is a working-class voice ever listened to rather than being openly derided for lack of diction and coherence? .......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/14/britishidentity-communities

[happyslug]

1. Remember this is an ENGLISH Newspaper, so Liberal=Conservative.

Thus the sentence that contain the following Language "disregarded by liberals and the left alike".

Remember only in the US is the term "Liberal" tied in with the left (and that only since FDR). "Liberal" as use din Europe, means someone who rejected the traditional roles of people of Rural Europe and demanded an new "liberal" view of how things are to be done. This "liberal" view accepted that business should be left alone, that the best way to help the country, is to leave people do what they want, and if a person failed that was his fault and the government should do nothing to help him (and any organization against people who owned things, was a criminal organization against the best interest of the country, so Unions must be outlawed). Yes, what the GOP is advocating in the US, in Europe that is called a "Liberal" approach to governing. Thus ther above term which is to include both the left and right.

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. Not quite accurate

While in Britain, you can't equate 'liberal' and 'the left', as sometimes seems to be done in the US, neither can you equate 'liberal' and 'conservative'. For instance, in the 19th century, the 2 main parties were the Liberals and the Conservatives; the former survived as a party, but lost most of their power (the last Liberal PM was Lloyd George, who lost power in 1922), and merged with the Social Democratic party to for the Liberal Democrats, in the late 80s. They (I can more or less say 'we') are social liberals (for instance, it was a Liberal MP who introduced the law allowing abortion in Britain), but are not socialist - they aren't in favour of nationalising industries, for instance. They have always been in favour of free trade - when the Conservatives were more protectionist in the 19th century - and their origins, the Whigs, wanted the power of the monarchy decreased, while the Tories (origins of the Conservatives) supported the monarchy more strongly. This party still strongly influences what the British mean by 'liberal'.

In Britain, 'liberal' would be a typical description of a Guardian reader, if that helps. Someone who is concerned about the loss of civil liberties under New Labour; is not anti-union, but probably isn't a member of one themselves, and thinks they are relevant for employer-worker relations and negotiations, but not for formally setting national economic policy. They are in favour of progressive taxation, have a more internationalist outlook than the average Briton (eg are pretty much all in favour of membership of the EU), and think that prisons should be about rehabilitation rather than punishment.

[happyslug]

4. My point was aimed at my fellow Americas, not to Europeans

In the US Left and Liberal are viewed as having the same meaning, thus why I wanted to point out the difference between the American Definition of the term Liberal and its meaning in Europe. Prior to the 1930s the US definition of Liberal was the same as in Europe (This Herbert Hoover's offer to FDR to debate who was the most liberal in the 1932 election). FDR effectively changed the definition to include what had previously called the progressive movement in the US (Support for Government Control over the Banks, the Railroads, increase Highway spending, controlled by the states, and support for Unions, Social Security, etc). This merger of the term Liberal to include what previously been called "progressive" politics in the US was the hallmark of FDR, as oppose to the raise of both Communism/Socialism AND Fascism in Europe.

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. And your fellow Americans would be likely to get the wrong idea from your post

In the UK, "liberal=conservative" is wrong; and has always been wrong. "Liberal=not part of the labour movement" might be right, and "liberal=not socialist", but liberals and conservatives have always been distinct; and the meaning in the article is in no way "conservative". You can equate the British usage of 'liberal' to the socially liberal part of the US Democratic Party, roughly. Howard Dean, perhaps.

[truedelphi]

5. What's happening with the Parliament member whose office was raided??

C-Span here in the USA had very late night televised vids of the outrage that was going on. Has that matter been resolved??

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. Funny you should ask - a report came out only minutes before you posted

The British Transport Police (a separate part of the police system, who it was hoped could be seen as somewhat independent of the Metropolitan Police, who did the raid, while knowing about police procedures and approaches) have handed in their report:

Review of Damian Green arrest questions police methods

Scotland Yard is preparing to drop its leak inquiry into Damian Green after a review of their actions criticised the investigation and questioned its proportionality.

The review, carried out by Ian Johnston, chair of the Association of Chief Police Officers Crime Committee, was given to the acting commissioner of the Met this evening.

In a move which is likely to pave the way for a tactical withdrawal from the inquiry, the Met revealed some details of the Johnston investigation and promised that they would discuss the way forward with the Crown Prosecution Service as soon as possible.

A statement from Scotland Yard implied that Johnston had questioned both the proportionality of the arrest of the shadow cabinet minister over leaks which were not issues of national security, and queried whether the investigation met best practice and current Met police policy.
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/dec/16/damien-green-arrest-review-police

Given they're still fellow policemen, most commentators are seeing this report as highly critical - saying that while nothing illegal seems to have been done, the actions overreached what was reasonable to do.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

2. Good points but

The anti-intellectualism and disdain for knowledge that has pervaded the public discourse is every bit as poisonous as the dismissiveness that the educated class shows to the working class. I'm sure it's not as bad in England as it is in the US but I'm told there is a fairly substantial Joe the Plumber element over there.