You can't vote for socialism the same way that you can't vote for compassion or faith. It's something you practice or experience. The great socialist movements came about by people banding together for the good of all in kind of giant self- help group, usually in the face of great adversity. Nobody voted for them. The true socialist's are the 'do gooders', those people who give up their time to help others for no reward. They don't have any political representation and perhaps wouldn't consider themselves political activists but they are. They are plugging the holes left by the current system that relies on their goodwill and selflessness to prevent the 'needy' falling through the gaps. How many people who consider themselves socialist give up their time to go and work in a soup kitchen or hand over some of their wages to a credit co-operative so the socially deprived don't have to go to the banks? Some, but not all. Instead of pointing at those that 'have' and demanding they hand over the cash, they should be looking at those that have less to see how they can help them.
It's quite possible to have a fairer more even handed society but it's got nothing to do with politicians. MP's who claim to want a fairer society should give up their seats and spend their time and energy promoting food banks, credit co-operatives, bartering systems, community assistance programs and enabling the disabled. Voting Labour doesn't make you a socialist. It seems to me that people who vote for socialist parties (if you can find one) are perpetuating the system they claim to despise and ducking their social responsibility. 'I'll vote for you and you can change the world for me because I can't be bothered.' Re -distribution of wealth doesn't work. Giving people money isn't social justice it just enables them to buy a bigger telly so they can join in with the rest of the capitalists but with less work. They don't need more money; they need less dependence on money.
If you buy an IPad, that's capitalism. If you use the same money to chip in and buy someone a wheelchair who then repays you by helping you out once a week, that's socialism. It's the basis of all major religions and you can't vote for them either, at least not in this country. If everyone who voted Labour applied their natural talents and turned their back on materialism to aid their fellow man, social inequality could be seriously improved within a very short time frame. Politics can't bring about serious social change on its own. It has to come from society itself. In the words of Elvis (yes, that Elvis) "a little less conversation and little more action"
I'm clearly no political scientist but it seems quite simple, if people didn't buy things they didn't need there would be no capitalists and the rich wouldn't get richer. If all the people turned their backs on materialism and turned to bartering for goods or services there is not a damn thing the government could do about it. If everyone went out of their way to help each other then everyone would benefit and everyone could contribute. Mr Brand says it's the institutions holding us back and keeping us down, the mysterious 'them' scaring us into compliance. I think not, it's that there is no serious desire to change, no-one wants to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty no matter how much they moan about it. They are quite happy to let the unseen army of the selfless struggle on whilst planning what extravagance they can invest in at Christmas and do their bit by voting labour and sticking a few quid in the charity pot. They like it just the way it is. They don't want to be reminded how ugly the world is and the establishment are happy to oblige.
Please feel free to shoot me down in flames, the only way to test a theory is to try and knock it down. If you're still talking to me that is.
** If you like it - please share it - thanks **
No comments:
Post a Comment