I was asked recently by a commentator on this blog to explain what motivated me to write it. I have given this some thought and in the spirit of Christmas offer an explanation.
It was some time ago that the Guardian described me as an ‘anti-poverty campaigner and tax expert'. That summarises what many seem to think about my work but it does not get to the core of my motivation. What motivates me is my disquiet with inequality. In saying that I do not just mean economic inequality, however important that might be, but all unequal treatment of people.
I have no doubt as to the origin of this concern. It stems from the fact that fifteen minutes after I was born my twin arrived in the world. I have no idea what it is like to not be a twin: I have only ever been one, and of the many influences on my life I think this fact, and my twin himself, are amongst the biggest.
I have in a very real sense never been alone. I shared a womb (I am wont to call him my ‘womb-mate'). We no doubt shared new baby parent attention. We slightly lost our individual identities together, because we were, inevitably, ‘the twins'. And I have no problem with any of that. He is, quite literally, my partner in life.
But he also introduced me to the reality of discrimination. We are not identical. We did not share all talents equally: both of us have skills that the other could usefully have had a bit more of. One consequence was that at the age of 11 I went to a grammar school. And my twin did not.
I hated the injustice of that. Overnight I was radicalised. That was in 1969. In the 1970 general election I argued long and hard for the re-election of Harold Wilson so that Labour's commitment to comprehensive education could be delivered. Nothing, in my opinion, could justify the discrimination of the eleven plus and the difference in resources allocated to the future education of each of us, or the constraint on opportunity that for far too many that exam imposed. I saw the hurt it caused. I understood the sense of pain. I also hurt. And I perceived injustice and after that I would never be the same again.
What was glaringly obvious to me was that my twin and I were of equal worth. I was angry then that anyone might suggest otherwise. I remain angry now whenever it is suggested that some have more innate worth than others. Discrimination in all its forms, as I became increasingly aware of it, was something that cut me to the quick.
I was early on aware of racism and my father's fears about integration because of his Irish background.
I learned of feminism from an early girlfriend who rocked the beliefs on the role of women my mother had taught me.
Prejudice on the grounds of sexual orientation arose close to home - and were immensely difficult in the 70s.
And my parents always made me acutely aware of poverty, and the impact it had on their own childhood's.
Other awareness followed.
Nothing has ever stopped my concern with these issues. Even when I realised that I was fascinated by everything to do with business I was never persuaded that this required me to abandon my principles. I have explained before now that I realised in my first year as an undergraduate that most of what I was being taught about business and motivation was pure drivel - largely because I began working for an accountant during my summer holiday when I was 17 and appreciated that the clients I met and whose accounts I was preparing were not profit maximising and had no idea how they might achieve that. My search for alternatives to the economics I was being taught began then.
That search very quickly led me to the environmental movement. I perceived pretty early on that considering the planet was no more than an extension of consideration for others - which by then was driving my politics. It seemed obvious to me that caring for the environment was simply taking the generations to come into account in the decisions we make, and this concern for others was, I thought, an innate part of being human that only training and indoctrination could overrule.
That belief has also permeated my religious thinking. I rejected the patrician, evangelical views of my parents. I became a Quaker around the age of 40. I have no clue whether there is a life after death. I have almost no concern as to whether or not there was a virgin birth, a physical resurrection or a feeding of the 5,000. What mattered was the radical message of Jesus the teacher - that he came to give good news to the poor and that we must treat our neighbours as ourselves. I stress that I am quite convinced these opinions can be held without religious faith and I seek to convert no one. But at the same time belief in these fundamental messages is, I think, a matter of faith nonetheless, even if I think that belief evidence based.
There is a significance to both beliefs that defines the way I view the world. I find the selfish isolationism that underpins too much of conventional economic thinking (whatever some conventional economists wish to say) incomprehensible and alien to what I see as the real human condition.
That is why I cannot also accept the view of the rational, profit maximising corporation. I do not believe that the the empathic individual who turns up at work can lose their innately human empathic capacity in the their workplace, at least not without significant strain arising and indoctrination occurring. And I think that to demand either is wrong, and the dictate of a cult (I use that word rather than culture deliberately) that denies the reality of the people we are.
But when it comes down to it, the reason why I do this is that I realise I have never been an individual as such. I have only ever existed in relationship with others. That realisation started with my twin, whose company I still share and enjoy quite often despite the fact that we are very different men. The unfair treatment of him at 11 changed me. I have no regrets about that. It made me realise that for all our differences from all other people - which we are meant to appreciate, cherish and enjoy - we are at heart in this world together with a duty towards each other that we have to fulfil with whatever talent and ability we have to offer at whatever point we are in life.
Of course I do that imperfectly. And I am all too aware that I get things wrong. But my sense that there is injustice that can be put right is what drives me. And when some seek to institutionalise that injustice in ways the reinforce discrimination and prejudice, for whatever reason, then I am incensed. The result is that I wake up every morning thinking that maybe, just maybe, today is the day when things might just get better. And if all I can do to achieve that goal is to write a blog post before breakfast then that's what I will do.
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:
From the heart, Richard, thank you for sharing… Merry Christmas to you and yours. 🙂
Thanks
And you you
I was brought up in the protestant faith, and could never understand the hatred that different aspects of the same Christian belief could bring out in people. Just the act of observing those around me convinced me that their was nothing in any of the churches fairy tale books that was worth trying to follow except for one thing, that I try, always, to treat others as I would like to be treated.
I will admit that I have not always been successful, but I believe that by trying I have probably been a better person for it.
That’s what faith is about to me
Richard, thanks for this “Apologia pro vita tua”. If only such thoughts informed the substrate, even the totality, of the current aphilosophical tosh that constitutes the current hegemonic mindframe, most of which was pilloried a century and a half ago by Lewis Carroll.
Andrew
Thanks
And have the best Christmas you can
Richard
Thank you. Have a very Happy Christmas.
Hi Richard,
Thanks for sharing this.
Wishing you a Merry Christmas with friends and family.
Neil
And to you
Whilst we’re on religion (as we almost are), Michael Hudson has a book coming out suggesting that Jesus was in fact an activist campaigning for the reinstatement of debt jubilees, which would seem to paint the bible as the first economic treatise….
https://renegadeinc.com/he-died-for-our-debts-not-our-sins/
Everything for a Happy Christmas!
His first ever public declaration, if correctly recorded, suggests that
Prof Hudson is well ahead of the curve on this one. I’m currently working my way through this – see below (phew!). If a certain Mr Welby needs any help in his C o E research on Christianity and debt and how to develop a fairer society, then my advice would be to talk to the good Professor based in Missouri.
http://michael-hudson.com/1992/03/the-lost-tradition-of-biblical-debt-cancellations/
Peter Selby, Grace and Mortgage, is a great book on that
That is really interesting. If true, another example of how popular history so often misses the mark.
Michael Hudson is one of the worlds foremost experts in the economics of the Ancient world ( he even knows the Babylonian/Assyrian / hebrew words!
He often points out how much more realistic they were then about the nature of debt and its destabilising role in society. A great scholar!
of course, the Gospels are laden with imagery connected with debt and economic relationships.
Thank you for sharing this Richard. Happy Christmas and a peaceful New Year.
Really interesting post Richard. Great timing too.
Although I come from a long (and distinguished) line of atheists, my mum sent us (her four children) to Sunday school to get some peace. This lasted until the fight to make us go became more strenuous than having us around on Sunday mornings.
The one thing that struck a chord then and that I, like Willie John, have kept with me all these years is the absolute logic of treating others as I would like to be treated. It’s not rocket science.
Thank you Professor Murphy. Your blog has been a revelation to me this year. I hope you have a restful Christmas and a happy new year.
Excellent article which articulated my own views on these things. I recall when I joined a large company back in 1970 that the Chief Executive addressed the staff and said, “The three most important things to me are the staff, the customers and the shareholders in that order”.
By the time I left, 40 years later, that had become, ‘The shareholders, the customers and the staff in that order’.
That’s about it
I care not what your religion happens to be, but I am grateful that you support and advise Scotland in the economic sense. Best wishes for the season and thanks for being you.
I find it curious that several of the people influential in my life have been Quakers.
Thanks for sharing your potted biog, Richard. It is always illuminating to know where a person is ‘coming from’.
I find myself now, curious about the story of the other twin. Which is not a request for indiscretion because that is a story only he can tell. Another of the billions of stories we will never hear, all of which make some sort of sense.
” I remain angry now whenever it is suggested that some have more innate worth than others.”
At bottom the Christian message is that all persons are equal in the sight of God and ‘we’ have spent two thousand years undermining , distorting and justifying the destruction of that very obvious and powerful idea.
We are reminded of that simple message every Christmas and studiously ignore it.
But the Solstice is passed and a new year begins and we may succeed in making something better than it might have been. So we keep on striving. (Or we die)
Andy
My twin’s story is his to tell
Best
Richard
One of the best pieces I’ve read anywhere for a long long time. Really enjoy the blog and your approach to the many economic and social issues facing us. But I now understand your approach even better. Thank you for sharing that. Have a great Christmas.
And you too
Thanks
Richard
A magnificent post. Glad I asked this question. I thought the answer would be interesting.
I am convinced that a small number of people doing the right thing can in the end yield remarkable results. I know of many examples of people who were never household names but whose impact will live on for a very, very long time and make a profound difference to the lives of others. I would just like to say that you are one of of those people in my book. I wish you a Merry Christmas and an even better 2018.
Thanks for asking
Best to you too
Richard
Merry Christmas when it comes
Is it a combination of your bloated ego and the fact that no one else wants to be associated with the drivel you mind vomit onto you blog every day?
That would explain this blog very well.
That and using the blog as cover for getting tax free money from charities.
That about right?
There always has ti be one…..
And for the record, although the grant from the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust could have, potentially, been non-taxable I paid tax on it. Which shows how wide of the mark you are.
I hope you have a good Christmas
Thank you Chris Pope for illustrating the kind of prejudice and ignorance that is just what Richard (and others) work so hard to address. I’d just suggest that you suspend your prejudices for a while and read the many posts here with an open mind. I think, or rather I’m absolutely sure, that you might even profit from it.
To you and to everyone else here – Happy Christmas
I was reading this, and I thought you’d probably like it as well: https://eand.co/the-year-we-learned-everything-we-thought-we-knew-about-the-world-was-wrong-5c3ff783ae21
Richard. Beautiful piece, that I shared with my wife. She said that your humanity has restored some of her faith in mankind.
Have a wonderful holiday season and New Year.
Jeff
Wow
Thanks Jeff
Good to know
The trolls have been out tonight
Have a good Christmas
Richard
I’m reading through the comments here and I must admit I have not seen Ivan Horrocks here for sometime – is he OK? Has anyone heard from him recently?
Anyhow, Merry Christmas all.
He is on Progressive Pulse occasionally – not often enough
Excellent article.
Merry Christmas to you Richard and all your readers.
Richard
I hadn’t heard about your twin before. I appreciate & admire much of what you do but you’re wrong about grammar schools.
Clearly, one school teaching all abilities would be great in a small town/village but that’s not how most of us live. Demonstrably, you need a lot of schools in a big city so the “selective” line doesn’t wash. Comprehensive schools select by area, or, to be more specific, they select by parental class, wealth & ethnicity since those factors define where people live. Is that fairer than deciding by ability at age 11 ? I don’t think so.
My boys were lucky enough to go to a grammar school &, fair play, top results are an advantage, but another advantage is that throughout their lives they’ve mixed with Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, white, Chinese & Afro-caribbean boys. Sadly, that is not the case for most children in the ‘melting pot’ of Birmingham. Go to school in Maypole & it will be almost exclusively white, Newtown,almost exclusively black; Sparkhill totally exclusively
asian & muslim.
Bringing back the 11+, & bringing back technical schools, would be good for everyone.
I do not have a problem with teaching by ability, or rather, to suit need
And I accept there is a postcode issue
But I reject segregation on ability