Politics July '98

Over the last few decades it has been ever easier to see the lack of any reasonable politics that lie in the traditional left of centre spot. What many perceived as having occupied this position since the 50’s, the Eastern Bloc or China, could under no circumstances be considered close to the ideal that they purported to espouse by anyone that really knows their Socio-Communism. However the demise of the Soviet Union and with it the other states of COMECON has had profound effects on the structure of the world and also the perception of left-wing ideology. The USA has turned it’s vitriolic attacks upon the threat of the Islamic world, in particular, Iraq. The seeming triumph of the capitalist West over the “communist” East has led also to a rise in various forms of Fundamentalism as Capitalism permeates every sector of Society and the average politics of the people and the institutions which govern or indoctrinate them veers alarmingly to the Right. One could be forgiven for thinking that there is not even any country remaining that conforms to the old ‘pseudo-communist’ order, China has been for many years America’s ‘most favoured trading nation’ and little mention is made in the media of Cuba or Vietnam. It puzzles me why the USSR with its ‘dangerous political ideology’ merited the 30 year armaments stand-off that defined the lives of most of the citizens of the Western world and the Eastern-Bloc and yet China manages to cover its political dogma with an invisibility cloak. Many of us cannot entirely complain as the Cold War perpetrated some of the most inhuman actions and politics and indoctrinated millions in both East and West alike to despise an ideal that was ultimately supposed to help them. The case of Cuba however, should not be allowed to be swept under the carpet quite so hastily; Cuba still lives under the shadow of an American trade embargo, this policy of the United States’ is in fact contra the orders of the United Nations, yet America appears willing to flout the UN regulations when it suits, and yet playing the World-wide police force when another country looks to follow this example.


The inherent hypocrisy and in some cases ‘toadying’ within the foreign policies of many Western countries is often embarrassing and sometimes downright immoral. Why is it for example that the United Kingdom handed over Hong Kong to the Chinese and yet refuses to contemplate doing the same with the counties of Ulster in Ireland? What is the difference in circumstances? The Chinese believed Hong Kong to be rightfully theirs and it was agreed that it would be repatriated long ago, although until recent times it was not clear if the British would adhere to their part of the bargain. The Irish believe all of Ireland belongs to them, all the provinces bar none. Their was no repatriation agreement, the British simply freebooted in during their military heyday, wishing to put an end to the support that the catholic Irish were providing to the Jacobite cause waging against the then monarch William of Orange. Perhaps if some settlement had been entered into then it would not be causing such problems now. What of the idea that the majority of Ulster considers itself to be British? The people of Hong Kong had the same idea, it did not aid their cause, nor persuade the British government to part with any full-citizen passports enabling the holder to take up residence in the UK. In fact it is more likely the case that there is a greater number in Ulster wishing the five counties to join the Republic, than there were pro-Chinese in Hong Kong. There is of course a violent history in Northern Ireland of terrorism and mindless slaughter, much as there has been in China - Tiananmann Square just one infamous example. So what is it that has made the situations so similar in essence but so different in outcome? I do not think it takes a genius to work out the disparity in world-wide influence that China commands compared to the Republic of Ireland. After all, only one is reputed to be a nuclear power, that same one with a vast army and general population, also called a Communist dictatorship, and yet enjoying trading status with the Western World far beyond the dreams of the former Soviet Union, such as America’s most favoured trading nation.

Britain is a country with a 50 year history of sucking up to our ‘transatlantic cousins’, a ‘special relationship’ which the United States sees fit to turn off and on as and when it suits, such as using it for bombing campaigns against targets normally far out of their reach such as Libya. Also their monitoring stations such as Menwith Hill which allow them to search all telephone conversations throughout Europe looking for keywords, presumably to keep an eye on the Communists and the genuine Liberals- let’s be frank the States has never really trusted Europe, and the sensible part of Europe has never really trusted the States. The problem is that Britain has constantly given the US a foothold with which to keep a close watch on the competition. Britain’s refusal to support any further European integration during the 1980’s must have had them laughing all the way to Capitol Hill. A way to keep Europe divided, and they didn’t even have to appear a part of it.


One of the main problems today, affecting politics, is the constant mutation of all forms of political ideology. There are no true Marxists, communists or capitalists anymore as the classical ideologies have been modernised/bastardised. This has happened to ideologies for centuries and in Western Europe ever since an unsuspecting Catholic monk named Martin Luther criticised the clerical establishment from a small town in south-eastern Germany and inadvertently created a new religious doctrine. Neither the orthodox ideas of Marx nor the economic ideas of Adam Smith are fully adhered to on either side of the political spectrum, and some might say they never have been. There is however, one ideology that through all its mutations remains terrifyingly constant - it is the doctrine of hate and jealousy, it is fascism. From Nazism to Fundamentalism it is truly the ideological Phoenix and the actions that it spawns are familiar to all generations even when the title is not. Unfortunately fascism is becoming more subconsciously accepted as order and conformity are the latest vote winners. This gives rise to a mistrust of variety or individuality and the outcasts from society - foreigners, drop-outs, drug addicts, the homeless, gypsies, the unemployed, non-conformists or romantic idealists become the universal scapegoats for the problems or the shortcomings of the have-nots. Hatred is whipped up by Right wing politicians and Armani-suited politicians who would have you believe that the foreigners are taking your jobs, smokers and other drug dependants are using up the NHS resources and all of the above-mentioned groups are responsible for the rise in crime and the destruction of the traditional family unit. The case in reality is that, in Britain as in most other economically developed countries, the foreigners are drafted in as cheap labour to do the jobs that the indigenous population would rather not undertake. This task is often the domain of the larger corporations who in Britain are able to take advantage of Draconian employer powers that after Thatcher’s dismantling of the trade unions, are exploited uncontested.

The hospital problem is equally uncomplicated, the ‘have’s’ use the NHS for the less important things but “go private” when it comes to the crunch. It is economically profitable whilst not being detrimental to the health for them to play the two systems and the government elected mostly on the whims of these people appears to mirror their lack of concern for the decline in social resources. Equally if the problem of drug addiction, by this both alcohol and tobacco, was handled more comprehensively and emphasis was put on cure for those already addicted and prevention for those who are not rather than economic profitability and fiscal usefulness, it would surely be easier to contain. I include nicotine in this because currently there are many complaints about the evils of tobacco and smokers are being forced to retreat into ever-smaller and darker corners to satisfy their addiction and I believe that nothing is being done to help those smokers who might wish to finally break free of the chain. In this respect nicotine should be classified as a class A highly addictive “hard drug” and smokers should be given the same chance for rehabilitation, provided by the state, as others addicted to drugs of similar genre such as heroin or cocaine. The cost increase in the short-term of this rehabilitation would be offset by the decrease in the medication, time and space required for the long-term treatment of cancer, emphaszema and bronchitis. The legal implementation of such a policy paper would be about a popular as a wild boar running amok during the Harrods sale and probably political suicide for the member responsible for its conception! The tobacco industry exercises considerable influence through its own profit making and tax generating potential and therefore whilst kept on side can be a good friend to an out-of-pocket government. As with all business relationships however, the right palms have to be greased. Perhaps the “Benson and Hedges” operating theatre or “Marlborough drug rehabilitation centre” would keep everybody happy. 


These are examples of the manipulation of the population by the industry magnates through the democratically elected government and the “modernisation” of language. It all leads to the same ends, namely intolerance, which is unhealthy in any society. Multi-cultural societies should be seen as potentially educational situations as there is always something that we can learn or appreciate about ourselves by looking, communicating and co-operating with those who are different from us. We Europeans should not forget that through the centuries of colonisation and civilisation of four of the world’s continents we established a metropolis/satellite relationship and “persuaded” these countries to accept out way of life as correct. They were taught through many generations that their respective colonial power be it France, Spain, Britain, Portugal, Germany or Holland was the Motherland, we really have only ourselves (or our ancestors) to blame if they have taken us at our word deciding to try to battle themselves out of poverty and famine by seeking their fortune in the lands of plenty.

It is interesting also to look at the linguistic differences in the way in which we refer to these people. For example the German word Gastarbeiter (guest worker) suggests that the person whilst being hospitably received is nevertheless expected to return home. The truth is that many of these workers in Germany, especially those from Turkey were drafted en masse as a source as a source of cheap labour with which to commence the rebuilding of the German economy post-1945, hence the largest percentage of these Turks remain in the Ruhrgebiet, Germany’s traditional industrial heartland. When they came originally throughout the forties and fifties there was no mention either upfront or in the small print that once Germany was great again they would be expected to leave. Equally the supposed huge influx of foreigners into Germany is relative in European terms. Germany remains low in the percentage of foreign per native population and is below that of both Belgium and France. The pressure cooker of the former East Germany receives a mere one percent of all refugees entering into the entire Federal republic. Now in contrast to this is the word for these people on Swedish Enwanderer which loosely translated means “wandering in” and clearly gives a different impression of how the person is to be viewed.