This is what Romeny said in his now famous video about the people in the US who don't pay Federal Income tax:
[They] will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47% who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what … These are people who pay no income tax …
"[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.
You can analyse this forever, but in truth what it really says is just one thing: he just does not care about these people. As a result he holds them in contempt. They're not worthy of his consideration. They're dismissed from his agenda.
That's narcissistic at best: it's callous indifference at worst.
And it's not just a US trait. Yesterday George Osborne announced he was considering a freeze on benefits for two years. As a result he will deliberately make those worst off in society poorer at a time when he is going out of his way to make the rich richer. You can analyse this forever, but in truth what it really says is just one thing: he just does not care about these people. As a result he holds them in contempt. They're not worthy of his consideration. They're dismissed from his agenda.
The repetition is deliberate. The attitude is the same.
This is what the left is fighting so let's name it. If at its kindest this attitude reflects a lack of empathy then you could call it the politics of indifference. But this is not just a lack of empathy, although that is obviously present. No, this is worse than that: because this is chosen and a lack of empathy is not. So this is the politics of contempt: behind these words and actions is a profound dislike that spills over into a desire to inflict harm on people poorer than those holding these views.
It is the politics of contempt that we are fighting.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Something I have thought for a few months now: this coalition is going through the political equivalent of rapid ageing. Napoleon Goveapart’s E-Bacc is just John Major’s 1996 policy ‘a grammar school in every town’, problems in the NHS have been brought on in the short not the medium term, nd the Chancellor is rooting around for any emergency measure he can find.
I kept this from Brad DeLong’s blog just after our 2010 election:
‘Agreeing with Schumpeter was Herbert Hoover’s Treasury secretary, Andrew Mellon. In his memoirs Hoover was bitter toward many, but bitterest of all toward Mellon, whom he called the head of the “leave it alone liquidationists.” Hoover quotes Mellon: “It will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people.” Hoover opposed Mellon’s policies, he said, and worked to undermine them. But what could he do? He was, after all, only the president. And Mellon was Treasury secretary.
Think Mellon is just an anachronism? Then consider current British chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, and his claim that today’s record-low interest rates in Britain are a sign of financial strength and not of anticipated prolonged depression: “The emergency budget in June was the moment when fiscal credibility was restored. Our market interest rates fell to near-record lows.” That is pure Mellon. It is definitely not Keynes. It is definitely not even Milton Friedman.’
That pretty much nails it. ‘Compassionate Conservatism’ my arse.
I have been convinced for some considerable time that the coalition government ( or more accurately the Tory government supported by the orange book Liberals) is intent on radically changing the nature and direction of our society. It realises that it is likely to be a one term government and is therefore willing to ride the political storm created by its abrasive policies in the full knowledge that it is unlikely to have to pick up the pieces (various social and health problems) afterwards. Compassionate Conservatism never existed and was just used by PR conmen to fool the electorate. It continues with its wellworn strategy of divide and rule , for example its onslaught on welfare recipients when fifty per cent or more of the welfare bill is consumed by senior citizens (such as myself) who continue to be protected. Tories have never been interested in social cohesion as their policies in the years 1979 to 1997 more than adequately reveal.
Some good articles over at rollingstone.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/a-rare-look-at-why-the-government-wont-fight-wall-street-20120918
also an interesting article on Mitt Romney,Bain Capital and Private Equity.