What is wrong with Modern Society

What is wrong with Modern Society The media is full of discussion about the role of the police following the murder of Sarah Everard. We are all appalled by the events around her death and calls for changes to the police. This is all very valid, but if we simple concentrate upon these issues we will not get to the root of the problem. The problems with society are embedded in the very nature of society. At the present time, there are many issues that have affected many people but are now becoming far more serious. The fear that many women feel about their safety in many situations is only one aspect of this. The many issues around racism, seen in all areas of life, the treatment of refugees, the acceptance of food banks, the increase in energy prices at a time when some energy providers are doubling their profits, the problems of mental health affecting many people but especially young people and the failings of an education system which fitting young people for a role in industry and commerce rather than helping them to develop their educational, social, physical and general welfare, the fact that young people are having to take low paid or none paid jobs before they are able to set out upon a career,the refusal of Government to protect the triple lock for pensions. These are all issues that affect people in their daily lives, every day of their lives What I have not mentioned are the major crises that we are suffering from, the climate crisis, Covid, the economic crisis and issues around immigration, the effects of war, racism, issues around gender and sexuality. These issues are, quite rightly, getting publicity and are inspiring protest. The root cause is the same as the problems I seek to highlight, The simple fact is that our country, and indeed the whole world, is on the wrong track. Whatever its defenders may say, capitalism is a failed system. The evidence is all around us. One recent example, the decision of Government to take away the franchise of South Eastern Rail. Another example is the chaos around petrol supplies. The climate crisis is the result of hundreds of years of misuse of the provisions that nature has provided for us. Whereas, in previous systems, due regard was made towards the need of the natural environment, under capitalism the sole criterion has been to accumulate profit. Let us examine what is the nature of a capitalist society. Although life was hard for peasants under the feudal system, there was an acceptance of some degree of mutual responsibilities. Land was held in trust, to be used, those who held the land had duties and responsibilities to those above them, and to those below. What capitalism brought in was the concept of ownership. But only a small section of the community had ownership, ownership became exclusive. The effective of this was that the vast majority of people possessed nothing, outside of their own body and abilities. If they were to survive, and one cannot survive without food, clothes and shelter, then they had to work for those who had the means of working. So the vast majority are dependent upon the minority of owners who alone can provide them with work. But this form of work brings with it exploitation. All wealth is created by labour. The worker brings his labour to the capitalist, who pays the minimum necessary for the labourer to survive, but, in working, the worker produces value above and beyond what was paid to the worker. Thus the capitalist gains value above and beyond that which was paid to the worker. In this way the capitalist is enriched but the worker ends each working day in the same situation as the day began. It could be argued that this is a simplification and that, although it may once have been true, the situation has changed. We now have an advanced economy in which people own their own houses, they have savings, they own cars, they travel abroad, they have shares, they are part of a property owning democracy. This may, at first glance be true, but it in no way reveals the true picture of what life is like even in the advanced economies like Great Britain. It is a fact that a large proportion of the population is suffering from poverty. This is true across all the different sectors of the population. If we consider young people as a case in point. Young people who happen to have been born into rich families, have great advantages over those who are not so fortunate. This affects their whole life experience. From a young age they gain experiences which help in their educational and physical development, whether or not they go to private schools where, if they do, they have better facilities, smaller class sizes, a better learning environment and the kudos that comes from having attended such an establishment which leads onto eventually entering prestigious universities and well paid positions in later life. But that is not the only advantage that these fortunate young people gain. Modern society, through advertising and the like, pressurises young people, as it does all age groups, into certain life styles, the rich can afford such life styles, others are left with a feeling of inadequacy, aspirations cannot be met. Such things as having mobile phones, lap tops, iPads, learning to drive and owning a car, all come easy, without expense, to these children of the rich, but are hard come by to the majority of young people. When we read of politician wringing their hands and seeking to express concern that working class young people are underachieving and not reaching the levels expected, all of these issues should be born in mind. It is not just that our education system is not designed to be equal, providing benefits for all, but is designed to be selective, to enable industry and commerce to choose whom they want, with the balance weighted in favour of the children of the rich Let us look in more details about our so called ‘property owning democracy’. A major change came about when Margaret Thatcher decided that people could buy their own council houses. Remember, that following the end of the Second World War there was a deep housing crisis. In spite of the economic problems face by the Country, a major programme of house building took place, indeed by different Governments, in the form of Council houses. Large estates were build, some excellently designed to meet the needs of people. For years, particularly in the inter war years, working people had suffered at the hands of unscrupulous landlords but, for a time, it appeared that this scourge had been removed. But alas, No! Thatcher sold of Council houses, at a cheaper rate, some families did gain, but the overall effect was to turn the clock back to the pre war situation. Many of those council houses and flats passed into private ownership but were later bought up by private landlords and are now let at greater cost to the tenants that previously under council ownership. The link between council, that is community, ownership has also been broken as large estates of council property has been handed over to Housing Associations, a means of removing them from social control by the community. (A similar process, even more detrimental has been the academisation of schools so that these are no longer under the ownership and control of the local community that they are meant to serve). There are many more examples of how, even given the iniquities of capitalism, there were some means of the population at large having some control of their lives. But gradually these means are being removed – a very serious example is the way that the National Health Service is being handed over to organisations whose sole interest is profit. I could go into further details of how the public were conned into buying shares in enterprises that they already owned, like Gas, electricity, mutual organisations which converted into banks, the whole telecommunications industry. The effect of this is now seen with the large increase in gas prices due to the failure of the government. Here we see a classic process that is capitalism in action. The Government sets up a free market in gas supply. It is the same gas which ever supplier you use, they use the same pipes so there is no difference except to whom you pay the bill. Smaller companies are set up to meet particular needs and to be more geared to their customers, however, because they are small they do not have the resources to cope when conditions become difficult. This is what is happening. The result, as we have seen, is that these smaller companies fail. The Government minister gets up in Parliament and pompously declares that Government is not in business to protect failing companies whose business model is not adequate. However, what has failed is not the individual companies but the system under which they were formed. At the same time as these smaller companies were collapsing, the larger companies are doubling their profits. The Government boasts that no one will lose their supply, what they mean is that these customers will now pay more, but pay it to the larger gas supplier who will now take over these smaller companies. The logic of capitalism is that larger companies take over smaller ones so that we increasingly have an economy which is dictated by fewer,and larger companies, leading towards a monopoly situation in which all control passes over to those large companies. But, my critics will say, you are motivated by greed and envy. Those people who have the wealth have earned that wealth. Under a capitalist system, anyone can become wealthy, just look at the lucky people who win fortunes on the lottery, look at those clever people who were early to see the advantages of the internet and social media and have created enormous empires as a result. Society depends on billionaires putting their money into enterprises and entrepreneurs who come up with amazing new ideas. A whole system is defended on the basis of a few exceptions. You cannot defend the system in this way. I was interested in attending a series of lectures on Higher Order Networks and emergent Geometry. This may seem a long way way from the discussion on the economic structure of society but much greater attention should be paid to this type of research rather than, as now happens, basing our decisions on the dogma and beliefs of groups and organisations, particularly the politicians and parties that dominate our Parliament. One conclusion that one of the lecturer was able to demonstrate was that ’nature produces patterns that do not exist at the individual level’. In other words there is a complexity within society and a dialectical relationship between individual action and action at the societal level. Things are not as simple as they may seem. Margaret Thatcher famously (?) stated ‘there is no such thing as society’. This is what the lecturer I have quoted was actually refuting (I do not think she would have put it this way but it is the logical conclusion of her remarks). We live in a global interconnected community. All of the problems we face come down to relationships. The choice we face is between an economic system. capitalism, which removes the individual from the system and bases its modus operandi on the operation of the ‘market’, a nebulous concept which has no real meaning, and a blind search for ever greater accumulation which in the long term (meaning in reality 2. 3. or 4 decades) will lead to planetary destruction. The alternative is a system that leads away from individual ownership and looks to a global structure in which we recognise the co-dependence of the individual with all other individuals. It is ironic that the structure, capitalism, which prides itself on the value and freedom of the individual should be the one in which the individual has no freedom but is at the mercy of blind forces over which there is no means of control. Under a socialist society individuals can both be respected and respect others because all are united in a common endeavour. Capitalism is based on competition in which there may be winners, but it is certain that there will be losers. Under socialism a few individuals may appear to lose out in terms of their possessions and wealth, but the positive gains that they will receive in terms of security and freedom from fear as all work together for the common good will far out way such considerations. Scribar 3.10.21