This hung parliament, however, proffers previously unbeknownst opportunities to the political-savvy person. It takes a decent eye, but with enough deliberation and care you can start to root out the social injustices that are taking place under the cloud of political in-fighting. This is why, dear friend, I suggest that our hung parliament is anything but a bad thing. No, merely it is representation of the directionless politicians who have been wrangling for your votes this past month. There are a few cases which need picking out, to avoid the possibility of them slipping out of the nation's awareness. The first, and a special one at that, is the issue of Gordon Brown. Now, I'm not sure under what fallacy he is operating, but as far as I can see there is no constitutional or moral mandate for him to rest his leadership on. Whilst it is his prerogative, as a technically undefeated leader, that does not mean he should. Becoming a martyr is laudable, but we have no codified, unifying document on which to rest this case. Likewise, morally, it would seem only too obvious for him to step down. Agreements are going to be impossible whilst he remains at the helm, and given Labour's fairly abysmal showing, it would seem logical for him to bow to party demands. Front-benchers and back alike are showing their true feelings, vociferously calling for his resignation. They are scared of the political fallout if he continues to bungle his way through the Prime Ministerial job. With a new, consensus-approved, leader they can start to work with the Liberal Democrats, and secure the electoral reform the country is demanding. Without this, we will be locked in a two-and-a-half party system until death do us part.
Gordon, it seems, can do no right. I personally have no real problem with him: he was an adequate chancellor, and has been a steady, if not spectacular leader. Admittedly he has driven this country into the ground, but he was merely the driver -- we, the people, were the engine, I'm afraid. The reasonable thing to do would be to step aside and allow Cameron and his oleaginous ilk to attempt to form a cohesive minority. This would be a bitter-pill to swallow, no doubt, but it provides us with ample opportunity for demonstrating his immaturity and inability to lead. With a floundering Conservative majority the country will be quick to boot them out when next year's inevitable general election rolls round. Commentators are already saying it: whoever takes charge will face unpopularity for all of the foreseeable future. That sounds like a good thing to me. Get out whilst the fire is hot, because in the long-term this is going to be a good thing for them. I don't care, personally, because it's soon to become a non-issue for me, but for the good of the country it seems the humanitarian course of action. Unfortunately, Gordon's resignation would leave Labour in an unpalatable position for choosing a new leader. The candidates are, frankly, hilariously terrible. I will pick on one, because he is my bête-noire: Ed Balls, Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families.
Now, if you are unaware of Ed Balls, then consider yourself lucky. I'm not sure who is propping up this antiquated piece of junk. His electoral majority is criminally slim, and under a fairer system of voting it seems as though he would have lost. I'm also not sure under whose authority he has appointed himself head of education. I'm struggling to find the moral, academic, or professional qualifications which endear him to this position. I don't mean to slander the man, because I am sure he is a decent chap at heart, but his pedagogy of Dept.4.Skewls has been laughably terrible. Under his premiership we have seen nationwide disavowal of governmental rule: the NUT is staging mass-protests at the ridiculous continuation of the SATS (standardised testing), and schools are failing. With a system geared towards teaching our children 'the test', we are seeing four-in-ten pupils leaving compulsory education unable to properly read or write. Yet he continues to lambast anyone who speaks out against it. Over the weekend, in fact, he undermined collegial authority by suggesting local authorities should suspend any head-teachers who refused to implement the SATS. The NUT, fortunately, pointed out that this was a gross over-step of his ministerial duty, and alluded to the cost the government would face when thousands of class-action law-suits arrived at their doorsteps. It's indicative of a petulant government, obstinately refusing to take the advice of its most trusted advisers. Just as with the drugs scandal - where a bunch of experts left a government-headed panel because no one was listening to them - here we have another demonstration of a Sec. doing his very best to obviate a liberal policy towards schooling. If headmasters are telling you that the tests don't work - and the league-tables, a heinous infringement on a school's rights, agree with them - then clearly a cog isn't functioning within the machine. Instead of defying advances by parents and teachers, he issues craven threats of redundancy and suspension: that is pathetic at best, and alarming at second-best. No idea what it is at worst.
His attitude, whilst unwelcome, is not uncommon. In a government where social progress is seen as anathema, it is unsurprising that adapting our curriculum to the moulds of our European counterparts is unpopular. The lecture of meliorism presumably wasn't taught at Ed's private (I'm just guessing) school. Nor was it at Harriet's, Gordon's, Alistair's, et al.. It is a shame. We are missing an opportunity for a total overhaul of our antiquated and malfunctioning system -- and don't think it is alone. Our tax policy is outdated and creaky, our electoral system is decayed to the point of disintegration, and our unelected House of Lords is a throwback to a Victorian age of despotism and monarchic rule. It is not good, in short. University education. Oh, don't get me started on university education. A friend recently said to me, when I claimed myself logical victor over an opponent, that sometimes you can have "too much logic"; using a cavalier fallacy then, it seems only logical that one can have 'too little logic'. Where is the logic in university education, then? The proposal runs thus: seek 50% attendance at post-compulsory level, cut university budgets by up to 9%, allow vice-chancellors to pocket an average 10% pay increase, and provide graduates with absolutely no prospect of finding a decent job. Seems self-defeating, does it not? It is irrelevant to Ed, however, who seems to rule with the dictate that independent learning should be run wholly independently. And, as part of my thumb, I would agree. The last thing I want is state-intervention in the running of our universities: they can't even organise a democratic election, or run a legitimate, legal war, let alone be entrusted with the future of generations to come. There needs to be some cohesion, however: a standard, a watchdog. Someone who prevents this negligence from happening. I have friends dropping out, crying, self-harming, attempting suicide: they cannot deal with the pressures heaped upon them by the crumbling infrastructure of post-compulsory education. The problem, then, lies within a purely despotic leadership. There is no room for people, we are dealing in abstractions. The country is crumbling, guys, and the inexorable slide to anarchy is speeding up.
The time has come then, for us to take back our country. I am not calling for revolution - what good would that do, when I, as the head, can only write? No, I am merely calling for people to speak out against injustice when they see it. I don't want people to take it up the jacksy any more; for too long have we lain down our defences, and been rogered by a philandering, crapulent, greed-filled whorehouse of a government. We should capitalise on this nationwide indecision: we have provided ourselves with the tools, so why won't we abide by our own catechisms? Don't hold clandestine meetings intent on overthrowing the government, but use our piddling laws protecting freedom of speech to do something about the mass, social injustices that are going on under our very noses.
---------------------
17.14: Gordon Brown resigns.
No comments:
Post a Comment