We are going to cut government spending and grow our way out of recession.
“Stay the course! Keep the faith with our leaders who share our pain when they make the necessary cuts, because from your pain and sacrifice will come your salvation.” Is that the essence of what I just heard from Nick Clegg here in the UK at the LibDem conference defending the cuts his party is facilitating?
“From your glorious sacrifices for the mother/fatherland/party/coalition, growth will come. ” Isn’t that what we are hearing from every leader from Berlin to Athens?
Is that the level of our party politics and debate at the moment? Am I alone in hearing worrying echoes of very unhappy times in Europe?
We have had political Fascism now we are on the cusp of Financial Fascism – a totalitarian financial system. There will be those who are working for ‘the nation’ and ‘the recovery of its economy’ and those who are its enemies. Today, in France, the enemy is the Roma. For all I know some of them may indeed be thieving parasites. But are they all? And does that cover the stench of victim finding? The bankers bring us to destruction. How do we respond, so ably guided by our politicians? We embrace their easy manipulation and turn on the weak amongst us. Dirty Roma scum. Never mind the bankers. Forget them. They are too hard to fight and hurt. Let’s instead vent our anger, and add to it a dose of secret self loathing at our own cowardice and dishonesty, and pour it down on someone who we CAN hurt. In times when there is not enough, it’s easier to kick a weak man and take what little he has, than to stand with him against those who have too much.
This is the moral peril I see waiting in the dark corners of our conscience.
Will we be put to a test this continent failed once before? I hope not. But the signs are not good.
Enoch Powell once started a speech with the following words,
"The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.
One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.
Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen."
Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after…"
A speech that gave his political rivals the opportunity to effectively finish his career.
I don't mean to offend or imply anything by bringing up old Enoch, he's about as popular as root canal work as Obama might say.
The point (wehey, there's a point!) is that where he saw the River Tiber foaming with much blood, he was hopelessly wrong. That level of perceived grievance can't be attained while living standards are generally rising.
But on the other hand, a sudden and catastrophic devaluation of the vast majority of the people's wealth…
Yours truly Unclear
Hello Unclear,
When I was younger I respected two british politicians. Tony Benn and Enoch Powell. Not because I thought they were 'right' nor because I agreed with them. But because both men, though diametrically opposed, were inteligent and principled and knew WHY they believed what they believed. They were not, as are most of our current political class, shallow oportunists.
You could debate with such people. They knew what debate was and respected its outcome. Firm opinions clearly stated and openly debated are far, far better than dishonestly massaged positions never debated. Which is what we have had for the last two years and more.
Your point is, to my mind, a vital one.
Hiya,
More Krugman:
The Angry Rich and Taxes
He's getting closer…