*waves flag and thumps rostrum*
So, David Cameron is proposing a "twenty-first century equivalent" of National Service. What a good idea.
Under the system, sixteen year olds would sacrifice their summer holidays and instead take part in "one week's residential course, four weeks of community service and a week's physical challenge." The latter part would apparently include something like moutain climbing or Army training. The programme, dubbed 'Citizen's Service' (I'm not sure if I like that phrase) could also include caring for the elderly and visiting developing countries.
Cameron proposes to take children out of their "comfort zones". According to the Daily Mail and ConservativeHome, graduates of the scheme would receive a cash payment (split halfway between themselves and a charity of their choice), employers would be encouraged to take note in the way they do of the Prince's Trust and Duke of Edinburgh, and, at the end of the course, the teenager will have to make a pledge of allegiance to Queen and Country and explain what they have learnt. I particularly like that part.
There are some problems, though. Cameron says that he would consider it a failure if, at the end of a Cameron Government, not all sixteen year olds were taking part. However, he's recommending this as a voluntary scheme. The problem is, those that need it most (though everyone in this country needs it to a degree) are the least likely to volunteer. Criminal, violent, disrespectful youths are not going to be first in the queue. They are driven by nihilistic self-indulgence and apathy towards authority - a renewed, updated National Service is, by its nature, a contradiction of that.
At the same time, just skimming over comments at ConservativeHome, there are some who oppose this as statism. My answer to that would be simple: conservatives are not antistatist. We have not been, and should not be, hostile to the state - leave that to libertarians. The state should not do much in the economic sphere, but if conservatives are for anything, it is for social order, nationhood and duty. There is no reason - certainly no ideological reason - why a conservative should oppose what some would dismiss as social engineering. Conservatives cannot support a morally neutral state in the way a libertarian does. We recognise that the state should promote and conserve British culture, history and nationhood. That needs proactive engagement. It is New Left liberal laissez-fairism that has delivered the social breakdown we have today.
My recommendations would be these then. First, the state should regulate and establish the programme of National Service, but where possible, contract its administration to the voluntary sector. Second, it should start voluntarily, but the waters of public opinion should be tested to see if, eventually, it can be rolled out to be a compulsury programme. Third, the scheme will not meet its aim of creating a sense of national identity and responsibility if the very people who need it most can simply refuse to attend. I would recommend compulsury participation for any youths ever convicted of a criminal offence, and would also give schools the power to refer pupils to the scheme.
This is certainly a step in the right direction. Society is a collection of individuals and institutions that have an identifiable connection (usually cultural or historical). In recent times under the New Left but also, I must say, under Thatcherism, too much attention has been paid to the individuals and too little to the institutions and the sense of belonging that comes with them. A sense of belonging is needed: of belonging to a nation, to a historical legacy, and to a community. Ideally this would be operated mainly by the voluntary sector, but I think there is significant room for state involvement, and maybe even compulsion. Ultimately, this is only one piece of the puzzle - I think a very heavy reintroduction of British history, politics and citizenship is also necessary in the education system. But David Cameron is right to identify the problem, and I very much welcome the basic premise.
Published by The Culture Warrior
on 6 Sept 2007 at 10:31. So, David Cameron is proposing a "twenty-first century equivalent" of National Service. What a good idea.
Under the system, sixteen year olds would sacrifice their summer holidays and instead take part in "one week's residential course, four weeks of community service and a week's physical challenge." The latter part would apparently include something like moutain climbing or Army training. The programme, dubbed 'Citizen's Service' (I'm not sure if I like that phrase) could also include caring for the elderly and visiting developing countries.
Cameron proposes to take children out of their "comfort zones". According to the Daily Mail and ConservativeHome, graduates of the scheme would receive a cash payment (split halfway between themselves and a charity of their choice), employers would be encouraged to take note in the way they do of the Prince's Trust and Duke of Edinburgh, and, at the end of the course, the teenager will have to make a pledge of allegiance to Queen and Country and explain what they have learnt. I particularly like that part.
There are some problems, though. Cameron says that he would consider it a failure if, at the end of a Cameron Government, not all sixteen year olds were taking part. However, he's recommending this as a voluntary scheme. The problem is, those that need it most (though everyone in this country needs it to a degree) are the least likely to volunteer. Criminal, violent, disrespectful youths are not going to be first in the queue. They are driven by nihilistic self-indulgence and apathy towards authority - a renewed, updated National Service is, by its nature, a contradiction of that.
At the same time, just skimming over comments at ConservativeHome, there are some who oppose this as statism. My answer to that would be simple: conservatives are not antistatist. We have not been, and should not be, hostile to the state - leave that to libertarians. The state should not do much in the economic sphere, but if conservatives are for anything, it is for social order, nationhood and duty. There is no reason - certainly no ideological reason - why a conservative should oppose what some would dismiss as social engineering. Conservatives cannot support a morally neutral state in the way a libertarian does. We recognise that the state should promote and conserve British culture, history and nationhood. That needs proactive engagement. It is New Left liberal laissez-fairism that has delivered the social breakdown we have today.
My recommendations would be these then. First, the state should regulate and establish the programme of National Service, but where possible, contract its administration to the voluntary sector. Second, it should start voluntarily, but the waters of public opinion should be tested to see if, eventually, it can be rolled out to be a compulsury programme. Third, the scheme will not meet its aim of creating a sense of national identity and responsibility if the very people who need it most can simply refuse to attend. I would recommend compulsury participation for any youths ever convicted of a criminal offence, and would also give schools the power to refer pupils to the scheme.
This is certainly a step in the right direction. Society is a collection of individuals and institutions that have an identifiable connection (usually cultural or historical). In recent times under the New Left but also, I must say, under Thatcherism, too much attention has been paid to the individuals and too little to the institutions and the sense of belonging that comes with them. A sense of belonging is needed: of belonging to a nation, to a historical legacy, and to a community. Ideally this would be operated mainly by the voluntary sector, but I think there is significant room for state involvement, and maybe even compulsion. Ultimately, this is only one piece of the puzzle - I think a very heavy reintroduction of British history, politics and citizenship is also necessary in the education system. But David Cameron is right to identify the problem, and I very much welcome the basic premise.
Labels: David Cameron, Nationhood, Social Breakdown, The New Left, The Sixties
4 Comments
For coming on four decades now, conservatives have had their heads in the sand. The purpose of this blog, over the coming days, weeks and months, is to do my little part to get them out. I am not calling for a Culture War - one is already happening, and it has been for four decades.
A strange blend of social liberals, democratic socialists, social democrats, so-called progressives, statists and cultural Marxists have silently united together under the banner of the New Left. What holds them together is their belief in the state, their disrespect for tradition, their moral and cultural relativism, and their understanding that the policies of the Old Left are economically and presentationally defunct. The New Left accept market economics because they know there's no better way to create taxable wealth. But make no mistake, they are leftists at heart. They believe in the control of the state. Unlike their socialist buddies, they're clever.
They manipulate language in a way that puts 1984 to shame. Note how the word 'freedom', which once meant a lack of coercion (usually on the part of the state), has now been redefined as a positive right - the 'freedom to use the NHS', or the 'freedom to be given Tax Credits'. This is infact opportunity, not freedom. Similarly the New Left has mischeviously stolen the word 'liberal', which was once very respectable and now...is not. Somehow, liberals are now people that want to extend the power of the state to allow people positive freedoms (how very Marxian...) rather than limit it. Such is their mastery of spin.
Of course the greatest triumph of the New Left of modern times is political correctness, a form of cultural Marxism so blatant that Joe Public can see through it like Gordon Brown's attempts to brand Cameron as an 'old Tory' whenever he asks him about Europe (a tactic that I personally feel should be up for Most Transparent Political Strategy of the Year).
Under the guise of political correctness, the New Left has put people and politicians in verbal straitjackets and has consequently suffocated not only meritocracy but also open political dialogue. Talking about immigration is racist, being opposed to the EU now makes you anti-European (a curious case of self-hatred if it were true). Worst of all is the obscene concept of positive discrimination, as if there could be such a thing. We know that the left, old and new, has always been opposed to merit, but they're being so gosh damn open about it right now. And yet - yet! - the conservative movement keeps its head firmly in the sand.
Let us just examine the damage our ostritch-fetish has done. In education, we have all this fuss about exams getting easier and kids getting too many A's. Perhaps it's correct - certainly it's something we need to discuss. But while we rabbit on about examinations, we neglect to realise that thousands of students, every year, will fail to pass any of them. We also have the literacy and numeracy crisis of primary school leavers entering secondary school without the ability to read and write. Why? Comprehensive education has turned schools from institutions to factories. The school ethos - always important to a proper education - has been demolished and replaced with reams of Whitehall directives to teachers. An overbearing National Curriculum has stopped education for its own sake, and the stuff the curriculum does shove down pupils' throats is progressive rubbish, usually consisting of Diwali, the environment, the greatness of European unity and the shame of the Slave Trade. Children no longer learn as a class, with the teacher as a clear authority figure. Instead they sit at little tables, chattering away and being fawned upon by the staff who encourage so-called 'individual based learning' (rather missing the point that children are more interested in playing and teenagers more interested in sex, and neither group are mature enough to realise the importance of working hard).
That is simply one area (albeit a very important one) in which the New Left have used institutions to create a leftist society (or rather, since the fall of the Berlin Wall, an anti-rightist one). The greatest product of the New Left is the chav - a topic we shall leave for another day.
So what is the point in all this, I hear you cry. So far you've identified what the New Left is and had a little rant about schools. It's all very well being bitter and angry about the way society is now, but if you want to change it, you've got to have proactive ideas!
That is what this blog is for. Hopefully we can spark a debate about how conservatives are to react to the leftist takeover of society. I'll be posting up essays and blog entries, and I'll be looking for your response. My basis thesis is this.
Conservatives believe in order, tradition, merit, enterprise, responsibility, respect, civility, institutions, nationhood, but, beginning with the Attlee Government and finding its full expression in the 1960s counterculture, many of these values have been demolished or, in that favourite exercise of the New Left, reinterpreted. The result is what David Cameron calls the broken society - poor standards and uninvigorating methods of education; a dependency culture reliant on the state for life; a breakdown in the family and the consequent rise in violent crime and gangs; teenage pregnancy and excessive alcohol consumption; an apathy towards politics and national heritage. Only conservatives have the values to mend these problems, yet for too long we've paid too little attention to society and culture.
The aspirational classes are on our side. Iain Duncan Smith identifies a conservative majority in Britain who share our fundamental values; who balk at the idea of a diversity officer or child illiteracy or the violence on our streets; who don't understand why they have to pay taxes to fund the lives of people who could work, or why a murderer can't be deported to his own country, or why we have to fund France's agricultural community. The Culture War has been raging for years, and we've ignored it. The New Left runs rampant in our institutions, from schools to the BBC, from the EU to the Civil Service. It is time for conservatives to fight back, because if we don't, pretty soon there isn't going to be much worth conserving.
Published by The Culture Warrior
on 1 Sept 2007 at 10:25. A strange blend of social liberals, democratic socialists, social democrats, so-called progressives, statists and cultural Marxists have silently united together under the banner of the New Left. What holds them together is their belief in the state, their disrespect for tradition, their moral and cultural relativism, and their understanding that the policies of the Old Left are economically and presentationally defunct. The New Left accept market economics because they know there's no better way to create taxable wealth. But make no mistake, they are leftists at heart. They believe in the control of the state. Unlike their socialist buddies, they're clever.
They manipulate language in a way that puts 1984 to shame. Note how the word 'freedom', which once meant a lack of coercion (usually on the part of the state), has now been redefined as a positive right - the 'freedom to use the NHS', or the 'freedom to be given Tax Credits'. This is infact opportunity, not freedom. Similarly the New Left has mischeviously stolen the word 'liberal', which was once very respectable and now...is not. Somehow, liberals are now people that want to extend the power of the state to allow people positive freedoms (how very Marxian...) rather than limit it. Such is their mastery of spin.
Of course the greatest triumph of the New Left of modern times is political correctness, a form of cultural Marxism so blatant that Joe Public can see through it like Gordon Brown's attempts to brand Cameron as an 'old Tory' whenever he asks him about Europe (a tactic that I personally feel should be up for Most Transparent Political Strategy of the Year).
Under the guise of political correctness, the New Left has put people and politicians in verbal straitjackets and has consequently suffocated not only meritocracy but also open political dialogue. Talking about immigration is racist, being opposed to the EU now makes you anti-European (a curious case of self-hatred if it were true). Worst of all is the obscene concept of positive discrimination, as if there could be such a thing. We know that the left, old and new, has always been opposed to merit, but they're being so gosh damn open about it right now. And yet - yet! - the conservative movement keeps its head firmly in the sand.
Let us just examine the damage our ostritch-fetish has done. In education, we have all this fuss about exams getting easier and kids getting too many A's. Perhaps it's correct - certainly it's something we need to discuss. But while we rabbit on about examinations, we neglect to realise that thousands of students, every year, will fail to pass any of them. We also have the literacy and numeracy crisis of primary school leavers entering secondary school without the ability to read and write. Why? Comprehensive education has turned schools from institutions to factories. The school ethos - always important to a proper education - has been demolished and replaced with reams of Whitehall directives to teachers. An overbearing National Curriculum has stopped education for its own sake, and the stuff the curriculum does shove down pupils' throats is progressive rubbish, usually consisting of Diwali, the environment, the greatness of European unity and the shame of the Slave Trade. Children no longer learn as a class, with the teacher as a clear authority figure. Instead they sit at little tables, chattering away and being fawned upon by the staff who encourage so-called 'individual based learning' (rather missing the point that children are more interested in playing and teenagers more interested in sex, and neither group are mature enough to realise the importance of working hard).
That is simply one area (albeit a very important one) in which the New Left have used institutions to create a leftist society (or rather, since the fall of the Berlin Wall, an anti-rightist one). The greatest product of the New Left is the chav - a topic we shall leave for another day.
So what is the point in all this, I hear you cry. So far you've identified what the New Left is and had a little rant about schools. It's all very well being bitter and angry about the way society is now, but if you want to change it, you've got to have proactive ideas!
That is what this blog is for. Hopefully we can spark a debate about how conservatives are to react to the leftist takeover of society. I'll be posting up essays and blog entries, and I'll be looking for your response. My basis thesis is this.
Conservatives believe in order, tradition, merit, enterprise, responsibility, respect, civility, institutions, nationhood, but, beginning with the Attlee Government and finding its full expression in the 1960s counterculture, many of these values have been demolished or, in that favourite exercise of the New Left, reinterpreted. The result is what David Cameron calls the broken society - poor standards and uninvigorating methods of education; a dependency culture reliant on the state for life; a breakdown in the family and the consequent rise in violent crime and gangs; teenage pregnancy and excessive alcohol consumption; an apathy towards politics and national heritage. Only conservatives have the values to mend these problems, yet for too long we've paid too little attention to society and culture.
The aspirational classes are on our side. Iain Duncan Smith identifies a conservative majority in Britain who share our fundamental values; who balk at the idea of a diversity officer or child illiteracy or the violence on our streets; who don't understand why they have to pay taxes to fund the lives of people who could work, or why a murderer can't be deported to his own country, or why we have to fund France's agricultural community. The Culture War has been raging for years, and we've ignored it. The New Left runs rampant in our institutions, from schools to the BBC, from the EU to the Civil Service. It is time for conservatives to fight back, because if we don't, pretty soon there isn't going to be much worth conserving.
Labels: Education, Ostrich Conservatism, Social Breakdown, The New Left, The Sixties
1 Comments