Neo-Liberalism Part II: Not Safe For Work (NSFW).

Why doesn’t the world change?

Generally, the public does not support Neo Liberalism. More accurately, the general public is not interested in mainstream politics because it’s so boring! Why is that? It’s simple. All the main parties are the same.

I’m not exaggerating. Even the Labour party leader, (now ex-leader), Ed Miliband explicitly said that there is ‘no differences between Labour and the Tories’. (And ‘The Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce agrees with him!). This sort of thing really does makes the whole politics thing pretty boring, imagine Game of Thrones if everyone just got along – how dreary would that be? No wonder the UK is turned off by politics!

There’s no real drama, no clashing of ideas, no chemistry! They’re all.. faking it, really.

Okay, I may as well say what we’re all thinking. In the last couple of months, Miliband and Cameron have been involved in a high-budget, low-quality political-porno void of passion or beautiful actors. To illustrate this point more clearly, I lifted the following text from an online porn review:

The production is pretty good and the amount of updates per week is also great. The search function and model browser is also good. […]

Not subscribing again and I’d recommend you stay away. 2/10

(Thankyou Gopher789z at RabbitReviews.com)

So what’s the point in rooting for one team or the other? Even if you did find a party you really did agreed with and you got excited about them, unless they are one of the 3 big parties (Conservative, Labour or SNP) you may as well not bother!

This is because of our awful ‘First Past The Post’ voting system.

The voting system is broken. This system is different to the proportional voting system because it doesn’t reflect the number people who voted for the party. That’s right. If that is shocking to you, let that set in. Our democracy is based on an arbitrary voting system that relies on pre-elected candidates and (again arbitrary) pre-set constituencies. As a result we get this:

12345

– Even democracy has been faking it! –

We really don’t live in a democracy. Ever remember in 2002, when Tony Blair wanted to go to war? Only 33% of the UK population said they supported his decision to start a war with Iraq… we still went anyway! Clearly something is wrong here. In order to challenge the Neo-Liberal problem, we need real democracy, we need real systematic change.

In order to achieve this ‘change’, it would help to understand the problem more clearly. The following section aims to equip you with the tools necessary to make you a PBD (‘Politics Bullshit Detective’ – copyright pending). This will help you spot the bullshit as it’s happening, rather than when the smoke has cleared and you’re left without your human rights, pension and dignity. How have these jokers been getting away with it for the last 35 years?

BD

Tactics of Neo-Liberalism

As stated in Part I, Neo-Liberalism aims to make the rich richer and the powerful even more powerful. Unfortunately, to achieve this goal, greater inequality is generated. This is a problem because the general public doesn’t like that too much. That is to say, that the general public is in favour of having free health care for all, a justice system that isn’t racist and a public service sector that has the wellbeing of the people at heart.  Neo-Liberal governments are more interested in profit than the wellbeing of the public. They see the population’s desire for a more equal society as an obstacle that needs to be overcome.

So how does it do this? Well, they have to somehow legitimise their behaviour to relentlessly seek-out profit at the expense of generating greater inequality. Some tactics to look out for are follows:

+ The manipulation of easy to win wars / battles in order to rally public support. (see, The Falklands War).

+ The punishment of unions in order to minimise the likelihood of organised protest. This includes the criminalisation of their actions and the physical abuse of their supports via police water cannons, batons etc. Additionally, union leaders are subject to character assassinations in the media and they may even be intensely monitored and eventually killed. (see, Thatcher’s crack down on miners in the UK).

+ The redirection of blame and the use of ‘folk devils’. Folk devils are groups of people who are easy to blame for government failings. Why are they easy to blame? Because they are powerless and highly visible to the public. Folk devils are most often, Immigrants, ‘welfare cheats’, the homeless, job seekers, ‘hoodies’, etc. Neo Liberal states often blame corruption or the inadequacies of others for their behaviour. By doing so, they justify their otherwise inexcusable behaviour. (see, Cameron’s insistence of the Bedroom Tax which targets the most vulnerable people in society most – the poor and medically disabled).

+ The use of rhetoric. This is simple old fashioned snake tonguery. This does not work on the more critically educated sectors of society. Regardless, mainstream news channels and other forms of media such as newspapers, school text book and the like will praise ‘Free Market’ capitalism and insists that this is the way of progress – even when faced with evidence to claim the opposite. (see, The Chicago Boys in Chile)

Military support. A trait in Neo-Liberal societies is that the government will often increase the wages and money allocated to military expansion. This is because Neo-Liberal governments largely rely on war to rally support. Furthermore, if the military views the government favourably, they are likely to assist in controlling the public, if necessary. (see, The UK / US use of military hardware in airports and street protests in the 2000’s).

+ The declaring of a ‘State of Emergency’. Neo-Liberal states often declare this in order to legitimise their use of force. This ranges from soft force to strong force. For example, a government may legitimise the selling of public schools, hospitals, etc because the nation is currently engaging in some form of intense struggle. This is soft force. Conversely, the government may make use of strong force by authorising live ammunition at public protests, for example.


 

In the Next Issue…   

In the final part of this trilogy, we will discuss how to kill this mother.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *