Wednesday, June 03, 2009

The Belief Of The British Political Class In Its Own Exceptionalism Revisited

I've been writing posts which reference the British political class's belief in its own exceptionalism for some months now.
The Parliamentary expenses scandal is the proof of that belief.
In his book 'How the Reformation Happened', Hilaire Belloc recorded how the decline of Catholic belief in the British Isles was more the result of generations growing up without the habit of Catholicism as through any sudden change in public mood. The English Reformation had no Winter Palace moment, no Father Gapon, no Battleship Potemkin; just a slow and steady erasure of habit, abetted by the repetition of the same lies, and to which the forces of truth were too slow to respond.
Precisely the same process of rewriting history through myth-making and outright lies has been at work since at least 1997, and the accession of New Labour. We are not 'a nation of immigrants'; never have been. Yet that is the official lie, designed to condition the people into a way of thinking from which they can never be turned aside, which began to appear shortly after that date. Privatisation robs a man of his goods; cultural privatisation, the redefining of a culture according to the whims of a rather freakish cultural elite, is vastly more insidious. No doubt the plan is to say it often enough to ensure it seeps into the common consciousness, to become an accepted habit of thought; the advance of minority parties shows it to have failed massively.
Friedmanism is a philosophy which cannot exist within a spirit of intellectual competition, which is perhaps why so many Friedmanite regimes have been politically oppressive. Wherever Friedmanism appears, the lawbook has to be rewritten to accommodate it. It is ironic that a philosophy based on the virtue of competiton can stand no competition itself. It is elite guff, of and for the rich. The Friedmanite neoliberal is not content to crush, stamp upon and pauperise his fellow man and rob him of his share of common goods in the names of freedom and market forces; the victim must also consent to the process. Yet the expenses scandal is proof that the people do not consent to the development of a Latin American-style political elite. This is a very hopeful thing.
From now on, our politicians will just have to learn that their careers are time-limited; and that the best things in life are sometimes not as free as they'd like.

4 Comments:

Blogger James Higham said...

This is a copy and paste and answer down the track job.

03 June, 2009 13:06  
Blogger PJMULVEY said...

Martin: I agree with your statement about Belloc's assessment of Catholicism slowly declining in England because of the lack of Catholic habit. However, rather than Catholic forces being slow to act, which is correct in part given the half-hearted efforts of Rome to send Jesuits into the mouth of the lion, it was the fascist and police state set up by the Cecil's, using Machiavellian's tactics such as disinformation, informants and negative propaganda that made Catholicism a foreign rather than domestic idea and religion. The same process is underway today, using the same Cecil techniques such as political rather than religious correctness to gradually over a few generations erase 2,000 years of Christian memory/morality and replace with it adherence to the neo-paganistic, Darwinian,and global State run by a bureaucratic elite operating with the large Friedmanite oligarchies. We modern day recusants and resisters however know the game plan (and motivation of street corner cameras) and I believe their goals will be eventually foiled as is happening on a small scale in the UK with the expense cheaters and the coming inquisition in the USA of Washington-Wall Street corruption.

03 June, 2009 18:25  
Blogger Martin said...

I'm sorry, James, I don't know what you mean.

04 June, 2009 06:11  
Blogger Martin said...

Patrick,

Perhaps it's the case that the police state element is absolutely necessary to such projects; yet it is bound to fail, if only because the major difference between then and now is mass literacy, itself under attack from poor and ideological education and uncreative broadcasting.

04 June, 2009 06:21  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home