If I were to draw a New Yorker style cartoon to parody the upcoming election, it'd depict one lame, tired ass wrapped in yellow, blue and red ribbons, staggering its useless behind to the finish line. A lot ain't going to change folks, no matter who gets in.
I don't usually talk about politics, but the election is as good an excuse as any. Below is a rundown of the key issues, and why I’m damned to vote for any of the three major parties:
Climate change
I’m not a scientist, so the fact that I don’t really ‘buy’ human caused climate change theories is irrelevant. However, I do reject that there’s a scientific consensus.
My main gripe with the model, pushed by all the big three political parties, is that- even if we converted the entire grid to renewable energy- the energy needed to do so would create a carbon deficit so large that we'd plummet head-on into a global apocalypse. Not only that, but- as Noel Gallagher said "how are we going to convince everyone in China to turn off their fridges?"
To delve deeper, the green movement is fundamentally doomed, simply because the entire capitalist system would be utterly undermined by a free-power economy. Was anyone really surprised that the Copenhagen Climate Conference was an utter failure? Scarily, the system's rejection of efficient energy technology goes on all the time.
A family friend worked for a major motorcycle manufacturer and, around 20 years ago, he invented a carburetor engine which could achieve around 200mpg (if I remember correctly). Suffice to say, the idea was bought out by an (faux-interested/friendly) oil company- making him wealthy. The technology itself, however, was quietly swept under the carpet.
This presents an interesting dilemma. If we back a capitalist agenda then should we also accept this suppression as necessary to perpetuating the system? Or- as has become all the more real over the past few years- is it a sign that we are just putting off the framework’s inevitable collapse?
Which brings me to...
The economy
Again, I’m not qualified to say for certain which party’s system would work best- and probably neither are you (the last collapse was only predicted by a fringe few). A businessman said to me the other day: “I think the Tories would be better for the economy in general, but they would cut public service and jobs significantly so as my business relies on public enterprise, we’d be harder hit under them”.
This sums it up really. It’s just a monetary tug-of-war. The natural urge is to punish those b(w)ankers who caused the crisis- capping bonuses etc- but, in practice, if we stifle their earning power, then we will weaken our international competitiveness when we need to be picking ourselves up.
I don't pretend to have the solution here. What has become pretty obvious though, is that the current inflationary, debt-based system, promoted by all three major parties, is rotten at the core. It’s no coincidence that people who invested in gold and other 'tangible' stocks profited greatly during the recession.
The mainstream media has largely ignored the route causes of the financial collapse. Some respected economists from the Wall St Journal are holding 'The End is Nigh' placards already, encouraging people to start hoarding food and to prepare for social uprisings. Extreme maybe, but what about the next, inevitably worse, recession? What if hyperinflation kicks-in next time? How long can a federal reserve style system where money is based literally on nothing survive?
(watch this video for a crippling analysis of why the system is fundamentally flawed)
Europe/ Immigration
As a rule of thumb, it’s best not to align yourself with Robert Killroy Silk, however, on the issue of Europe, I think he has a point, even if his party members have shown some worryingly right-wing viewpoints.
The EU is basically an unelected, unaccountable, money-frittering entity eerily akin to the Soviet Union in its setup. In my view, we'd be supporting human freedom by opposing it. Brussels has a disproportionate amount of control over the UK and stifles our businesses. It’s sly, undemocratic insistence that we adopt the Lisbon Treaty is an abomination. Sure, there is a degree of altruism in helping out poorer member states, but I think we’d be better off adopting free-trade with Europe on our own terms and conducting altruism via fairtrade schemes and the like.
This man spells it out well. Basically our EU membership is leaking billions each year whilst encouraging more people to flood into our crowded island. Opting out of the EU would allow us to better control this. And, no, none of the three parties would be any good in this area- they just confuse the issue. It is not ‘racist’ to oppose immigration if the infrastructure is not coping- it's common sense.
What is more evidently ‘racist’- to go off on a slight tangent- is New Labour’s preoccupation with demonising certain racial minorities. You are twice as likely to die under a vending machine than by a terrorist attack, yet under this strange guise, we’ve utterly sold out on the basic human rights earnt the hard way over 1,000s of years. Labour has created a legal framework for an Orwellian dystopia. And, yes, the Tories would have done the same, or worse.
Race is the thorniest of issues, but I think they miss the point. White, black and Asian lawyers, for example, all hang out together in the same way that council estate youngsters with different skin tones do. People are united by circumstance, so I slightly resent Labour and the Tories preaching about 'integration'. People with similar things in common, be it religion or trainspotting, will always flock together.
That said, aspects from every culture, rac and movement spill into each other, enriching the fabric of society. Something Nick Griffin will never fathom.
Foreign policy
Iraq was a wake-up call about how government is run. We don't vote for a party, we vote for more powerful, shadowy elite of businesses whose agendas can quite literally kill innocent people.
Like pretty much every war it engages in, the West entered Iraq on false pretenses. Sure, Saddam was an evil tyrant, but ‘regime change’ was always going to be fail. It’s never worked before, but now the blood is on UK/US hands, not Saddam's.
Military intervention is just a new spin on colonialism. The joke, to use the least appropriate word, is on us though, because a sure sign of a failing empire is when a country spreads its international disputes too wide, whilst facing economic turmoil domestically. Ring a bell?
Afghanistan, which all the three major parties back, is another farce. Bush said "we're fighting 'them' there so we don't have to fight 'them' here". However, even the mainstream media has exposed the myth that is al Quaeda- and Dick Cheney backs it up too. (I really recommend the linked BBC documentary by the way). Soldiers need to wake-up and ask the same questions this man did.
More evidence that corporations run governments (not that we need it) is shown in the failure of Obama to withdraw troops, despite his pre-election promises.
Education/ Science/ Technology
The most important starting block of any government is that, on a biological level, we’re all born as walking bags of genes, waiting to be expressed in whichever way our environment dictates.
The rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer in the current system, yet the Tory framework (continued by New Labour), and egged on by Daily Mail headlines, actually encourages the very environment they so fear. Define irony?
To put it crudely, by creating a system in which a deprived, angry, undereducated class emerges, we’re putting everyone at risk. The Conservative’s proposed solution of discipline, hard sentences etc is, transversely, part of the cause of the problem in the first place.
The book They Fuck You Up by Oliver James clearly shows how the first few years of a person's life shape them forever. Constant exams, competitiveness, consumer culture etc is having a serious detriment. Happiness should be the end goal, not profit. We should look to Denmark to guide us.
Conclusion...
In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World,the government creates a society based on an iceberg metaphor in which eight-ninths of the population remains 'underwater'. It doesn’t pay to have smart, enlightened people, basically. Especially if they're poor.
I don't think it's going out on a limb to say that the current three parties all secretly follow this doctrine to a degree. Perhaps I'm naive, and this is the best we can expect. Until I'm proven wrong though, I'm going to opt for liberal, and some may say idealistic, politics. Out of the big three, The Lib Dems most resemble that, I guess.
What's more, in the recent debates, Clegg and Brown actually back-up their visions honestly by admitting they will raise taxes. Cameron's "let's cut waste" claim in painfully transparent. Clue: he means jobs.
A Tory parliament would almost certainly be woefully split, a Labour one would be too stagnant and, to my utter distaste, would introduce invasive ID cards. A Lib Dem setup would be inexperienced, but at least they'd likely be united.
Out of the major three then, Clegg is making the best case for my cross in a box, even if I am slightly sick in my mouth when I do so. Can we have a clean up in Polling Booth 3?!
