Neo-Cons on Welfare Benefits 179

Our three neo-con major political parties have come up with a jolly cunning plan to lift money direct from the taxpayer, in addtion to being paid by big business to promote the interests of big business against the people.

A government inquiry is recommending that £20 million a year in public funding be given to the three neo-con parties. Is there no end to their greed? I suppose the logic is perfect – it will finally cement into our political system the monopoly of power by parties that are arrogantly unrepresentative of the will of the people, knowing that their system, above all by control of the media, locks out any alternative from competing for political power.

I write with certainty that all our three political parties are now neo-conservative, but with great sadness. The Tories became fully neo-con around 1979, New Labour around 1996 and the Lib Dems around 2010. All the parties contain still a minority of resisters, the fewer the longer they have been neo-con. So Ken Clarke is an almost entirely isolated resister in the Tory party, Jeremy Corbyn one of very few left in New Labour, while the Lib Dems still have a few Norman Bakers who have not yet been entirely corrupted by power and money, but you can see the process working on the Lib Dems like acid and their integrity will have been completely eaten through in another 18 months.

Meanwhile, there are some who don’t get it, like poor deluded old bat Polly Toynbee, who still has not worked out that New Labour went neo-con. Yesterday’s Toynbee article has the headline: “Executive pay soars while the young poor face freefall. Where is Labour?” You are a fool, Toynbee. The ex-ministers of the last New Labour government are in the boardroom picking up those massive remunerations and perks you are rightly complaining about. Did you really not know that, or do you just refuse to see?

New Labour is now neo-con, Toynbee. It is fifteen years since Peter Mandelson said that “New Labour is intensely relaxed about the filty rich.” Mandelson and Blair and Hewitt and Jowell and Milburn and Burnham and Reid and Blunkett and the whole lot of them are now filthy rich. Somebody explain this to Toynbee.

But it is an extremely important point that I did not see a single mainstream politician yesterday questioning the obscenity of directors’ earnings rising over 49% last year – from a huge base – when average real incomes were falling. The media was packed with apologists explaining trickledown theory to us. I also noted that the Occupy movement needs to beware of the media appearing to give them coverage, when in fact the media are deliberately picking on people whose hearts, instincts and minds are all in the right place, but who lack media experience and formal education in the ground on which the media places them. The media can then give the impression of debate with the cards severely stacked, to make the view that in fact the large majority of those at home will hold, that executive salaries are obscene and untenable, appear amateur and ill-informed.

The parties do not represent us and their collective membership is falling, as they are now a vehicle for career rather than belief. No wonder they want to pick our pockets to keep up the pretence of democracy.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

179 thoughts on “Neo-Cons on Welfare Benefits

1 2 3 4 5 6
  • Guest

    Ruth, your post above is contradictory!. You will in the long run change nothing, it is in the end those who hold the reins of power who ultimately decide the direction we go. We may be able to slow them down, but ultimately they still decide the direction we go. Why not start a new daily newspaper, start up a television station, there must be enough people around who would contribute. It is indeed a mighty endeavor, but I can see no other way open to us.

  • ingo

    Only done three poibnts to start the ball rollin’, feel free to join in.

    Visited the occu[py Norwich camp yesterday and watched as middle class people debated the ins and out of their camp, what going on with Ceo’s wages etc., slowly the public is waking up, but their personal agenda’s and life styles are still their first priority.

    I mentioned that the US movement has included the agenda of homelessnes in their aims, and the chaps replied that he has been homeless for half of his young life, he was in his late twenties and looked like he’s mid thirty.

    That one cannot rely on the help of the established and dependent churches, at the heart of todays evil empires, is an indightment against themselves, nothing to do with us. the Protesters have opened their open door agenda to them and they have rejected coming in from the cold. This does not mean one has to shut out the church, but their gospel has to be taken with a pinch of salt, well those bankers propably prefer Osbornes favourite catnip as an accomplishment.

  • Komodo

    @ Guest –
    No. That road leads either to yet another doomed lefty hippy enterprise which only lefty hippies read, or (due to the large amounts of cash required) something prone to subversion by its patrons and infiltration by the establishment. Use the available resources. Use some other bugger’s capital, in other words: first principle of business. Use (as many are already doing) the internet. Do not become an identifiable entity. Otherwise you have learned nothing from history.

  • deepgreenpudock

    for some reason I seem to not be able to post comment. I shall try again

    I followed the link to the Hilda Murrell site. I remember the speculation about the murder of course.
    I then went to the (Guardian) report of the trial and it was based on the presence of DNA on the clothes of the victim.
    The convicted person is reported as saying that it was his brother who killed Hilda Murrell, while both of them were involved in burgling her house.

    Now I know it is possible that the Guardian shamelessly falsified the report of the court case, and that the police and jury were bribed, threatened, hoodwinked, or whatever by some masterly intelligence operation, and that the scientists doing the DNA tests were also hoodwinked/nobbled in some way, and that the convicted man was persuaded to concoct the story about his brother and him committing the burglary. He got fifteen years mainly due to his age at the time so not much of a plea bargain there. Is he available for coment? is there a widespread campaign for his release due to a miscarriage of justice?
    The problem is that there is just such a mountain of things to do to concoct the conspiracy .It all becomes vanishingly unlikely all those threads can be spun together into a coherent story.

    If I was some dastardly intelligence operative of the UK charged with killing some awkward elderly agitator living in a place which is quite private, would I want to take the risk of such a convoluted plot? No! I rather suspect it would be some other much simpler plot such as car accident i(f there was to be one at all). How afraid were these vested interests likely to be of a rather elderly private individual, no matter how able that person might be.

    Someone such as Hilda, presenting a case to a whole lot of pre-converted sympathisers, about something already known to be associated with an extreme polarisation of opinion, was unlikely to suddenly develop such powers of communication that the controversy would swing decisively behind the idea of abandoning nuclear power in its entirety in the minds of the great majority of the UK population.Why kill her? Why not just get a specialist to write a rebuttal to her POV? Cheaper by far and much easier. As for the Belgrano being sun illegally. My guess is that a majority of the population at the time thought th Argies got what they deserved. I don’t agree with this attitude at all, but it is delusional to not recognise that the dominant attitude at the time was indifferent to the legality of the sinking.
    We might also ask, why were other more prominent, more influential anti-nuclear commentators not murdered? Was Bruce Kent a target, did he survive by being corrupted or bought off?
    I don’t think so.
    I am not unsympathetic to some of the material I see here. Some of it is interesting and challenging and worthy and I am certainly sympathetic to the cynicism about the degradation of politics and its abject failure to answer some of the huge issues of the times , and yes, I see it as an opportunity for something better. The sense of the corruption of politics and the widespread adoption of worthless theories (by dishonest people who knew perfectly well they were worthless) and ideas which have been extremely damaging, and are being progressively discredited, is now quite widespread but in reality we are only at the start of a process of change and increased consciousness.
    Attaching this legitimate, and almost obligatory, and rational discontent and challenge to power, with something so tenuous and
    unlikely, discredits the general position of the blog and contributors.

  • Guest

    Komodo, take a leaf out of the “Neo-Cons” book…Where there is a will, there is a way.
    What about asking John Pilger to be editor of a new daily newspaper, what about asking Greg Dyke to be in charge of a new television station.

  • Komodo

    It occurs to me that austerity is a good word, but a lousy policy if you are seriously interested in business. If those still employed bought less unneccessary stuff, instead of chucking their wages away on shiny new crap, that would deliver a serious hit to this crumbling economy. Komodo’s sermon for today: BUY LESS STUFF. YOU CAN’T AFFORD IT ANY MORE.
    And if you think you can, wait for the next round of QE. It doesn’t stop until our wages are the same as India’s, in real terms.

  • Komodo

    Sorry, Guest,
    I’ve worked on a lefty hippy paper, and I am not an optimist. The running costs of a media outlet have to be met somehow, and they are large. The advertising budgets of ethical, sustainable enterprises are not large. Private contributions fade out quickly (although, I believe, Francis Wheen backed our desperate enterprise nobly, and this may be his only acknowledgement). And it inevitably ties itself to an editorial policy, which may well alienate people who are in broad agreement with our premise (our government is corrupt) but disagree on important details.

    Greg Dyke, lol. Now there’s a guy who wouldn’t want to see a credible business plan, eh?

    A dedicated media outlet is IMHO a distraction, and a relatively unproductive channel for resources and energy. If I were HMG, it’s what I would be proposing any dissident movement should do, actually.

  • Guest

    “dissident movement”
    That is what we must change in the minds of people. We are a movement for/of humanity.

  • Ruth

    I agree with Komodo. We start with an online newspaper with different contributors known and unknown which deals primarily with current issues and the stance taken by Parliament. Contributors could keep to their area of expertise.

    Starting up a newspaper or TV channel would be fraught with difficulties. An online newspaper would come under attack so security would be paramount. The credentials of the contributors too would be a factor

  • stephen


    “Your line that (excuse the paraphrase) those who criticise NATO aggression are fellow travellers of the governments of the countries NATO attacks is so preposterous”

    But it is not my line – the neo fellow travellers are those who refuse to criticise the human rights bauses of Saddam/Assad/Gadaffi/Ahmedjinabad and constantly seek to avoid developing ways other than miltary agression of dealing with such abuses. Please remember the many apologists who remained silent about the famines, the treatment of the Kulaks and the Gulag because they didn’t want to be seen as on the sidfe of the imperialist capitalist west – when the reality that it was possible to be against both, as Orwell and many others demonstrated.


    Well said – progress is often made by two steps forward and one step back. It is the like of the Plan B economists that we shoudl be looking to rather than the nihilists.


    Perhaps before quoting Shelley’s fine words about the Peterloo Massacre – you should remember why that the protestors were there to campaign for parliamentary representation and free trade – two causes that many here seem to think have little relevance.

    Perhaps the following verses might have a better fit with your cause, and add a much needed dollop of glam

    Does anyone know the way, did we hear someone say
    We just haven’t got a clue what to do
    Does anyone know the way, there’s got to be a way
    To Block Buster!

    The cops are out, they’re running about
    Don’t know if they’ll ever be able to Block Buster out
    He’s gotta be caught, he’s gotta be taught
    ‘Cos he’s more evil than anyone here ever thought

    Does anyone know the way did we hear someone say
    We just haven’t got a clue – ow!
    Does anyone know the way, there’s got to be a way
    To Block Buster!

  • ingo

    Maybe this is warming the cockles of your hearts. We are not the only one’s that are hacked off, and we are not dissidents but he 99% of society that wants change. Enjoy and feel inspired, dare I say comment, I’ve added my two typos to the debate and Cloe will have to order another 26 different leaflets, I got the feeling that this time she will need more than the 300 bussed in Tory helpers, who got her elected first time round.:)

  • Gracie

    Komodo I do believe he has already said that that party is just Labour, alothough I think for a more formal review of it, there will be the findings of the policy review. By the way I am as frustrated as the next person to see things under way and taking shape and this policy review seems to be taking an age, hopefully it will be worth it when it finally does arrive!

  • Ruth

    We could have a section tracking certain issues that the government wants forgotten such as the fight of the doctors for an inquest into Dr Kelly’s death.

  • Quo vadis

    Who paid you, chinless one, during your career? The obscenity of your “earnings” didn’t bother you then.

    The workers paid for your dalliances with dancers, your alliances with arseholes. Now you try to kid us, and yourself, that you are some kind of class warrior.

    Bollocks. Class warriors don’t tailor their photo to exclude their chin. They aren’t so vain.

    You had your tongue and nose stuck very tightly up them when they paid you. It was only when you got rejected that you decided to become a hippy.

    Why don’t you stand for election? Oops, I forgot. You did. Ha ha.

  • Gracie

    @ Guest – I doubt that very much, I had 13 years to discover it and never did. Don’t get me wrong I am not blind to some of the things that went on, however, I honestly do not believe that Labour would have gone the same way and done the same things as the Tories. I would not have supported thme if I had thought that, Labour to me has always basically stuck up for the workers and those vulnerable people, with them gone, just look at what is happening to these people in side just 18 months. It was never like this in 13 years, I have no reason to believe it will be anything like this under Ed Miliband. He does seem principled and honest and wants to do the right thing, I really believe it is up to all of us who care about all of society to try and help Miliband and Labour shape the future. Political parties in the past have gone on about change, it has just been words, this time I do think that the people of this country know there must be change in the way we do business, I just shudder tot hink what will happen if this way becomes a right wing Tory ideology. Americanised, no welfare, privatised NHS, elected police commissioners, can’t you see it happening now? Look at the hysterical that met Ed Miliband for even suggesting that we must find a more ethical way of doing business, the right wing press nearly imploded and they and the Tories and their mates in TV were down on him like a ton of bricks! If we really want to change the way things are done then we need to get behind the people like Miliband who are trying to offer that change against an hysterical media and Conservative party.

  • Guest

    I wonder for how long many would be able to afford an internet connection if there were a sudden big price hike in these financial stringent times. Last thing to go would be the TV, newspapers can always be handed around. Which would be the easier to control ?. “Control” thats the word.

  • stephen


    All credit to the lady for using our hard won parliamentary institutions – but rather than saying what she is against I can see very little about what she is for other than Shirley Williams. Give that the SDP and Williams made their contribution to the Tories remaining in power for 18 years I’m afraid I don’t see this as much of a platform.

  • Guest

    Gracie, is that the same New Labour party that has said it would do the same to the disabled as the tory party are now doing. Indeed, it was their doing, the tories just continued New Labour policy, just as New Labour had continued doing Thatcherite economics for the whole of their tenure of government. Lets not go to PFIs.

  • MJ

    “It was only when you got rejected that you decided to become a hippy”
    Wrong way round I think you’ll find. Craig became a hippy and then was rejected.

  • MJ

    Mark Golding: a few months ago I remember you saying you were thinking of setting up a website where people involved in protests could upload their own videos and photos of the event.
    Did you pursue this at all? Now might be the time. I didn’t know for instance, until Ingo mentioned it above, that there was an Occupy protest in Norwich. This suggests that there are similar, small ptotests going on all over the place.
    Using twitter, facebook and your upload site you could help bring all the disparate groups together to learn from and inspire each other.

  • ingo

    Quo Vadis, tell us about yourself and you public achievements, why don’t you offer something positive rather than spite?
    Aas you seemingly have some hope left for this wretched system, feel free to posit your excuses, attck the ideas by all means, getting personal might backfire.

    Ruth, If you want reform and a different system, then it might not be a good idea to focus on celebritiers and names that have already been bracketted. That said these people could be very helpfull with advancing such national discussion, as long as it is balanced.
    I would not have any hope in a room full of marxists trying their best to outscream the Leninists and nothing getting done. Should the focus not be on pragmatic solutions, rather than the allegiances of old? Should the debate not be about long term solutions and involve all? Even those who did wrong and seen the errors of their way’s, as long as they don’t proffer the failing agenda’s of the past.

  • mike cobley

    Sorry, but I cannot go along with this ‘all the parties are the same, they’re all neocon’ stuff, which is really low-grade, schoolyard generalisation. I suppose I’m really speaking from the point of view of someone who is still retaining a Libdem party membership while despising nearly everything that the Clegg leadership has and is doing.

    But that’s the point – both the Liberal Democrats and Labour will have factions within them that hold to principles far more progressive than those evinced by the party leaderships. When Clegg came up to Glasgow for his listening exercise, he found himself having to face some accusatory questioning (as provided by myself and others). When told that he and the party leadership were supporting dogmatic rightwing tory policies he flew off the handle and insisted that the party could either be some kind of purist group without power or in power and putting party manifesto into action – those seemed to be the only two options in his worldview. Clearly, supporting vile Tory dogma is a price worth paying in order that some big chunk of Clegg’s manifesto (which I never liked) gets to be enacted.

    The truth is that the country’s leftwing and centre-left parties have both been subverted by rightwing cabals; the sooner we understand this on a rational level (rather than spouting useless, inaccurate generalisations) the better we can know how to deal with them, and the progressives who are still hanging on within them.

  • ingo

    Stephen, she is standing as an Independent, not for the SDP or Shirley Williams ideals. If she has any considerations as to having a mandate then surely that will develop during her door stepping. You would not want and Independent to come to your door pressing some UKIP agenda on you, would you now?
    I think she deservesd support and if I have the time I shall offer it to her. What she will say during the election campaign will not doubt be more refined.

    Gracie… Not here please. labour has nothing to offer as an alternative it is riven with infighting and their disgusting agreeance with most neo conservative/Condem policies is frightening.

  • MJ

    “Sorry, but I cannot go along with this ‘all the parties are the same, they’re all neocon’ stuff, which is really low-grade, schoolyard generalisation”
    “The truth is that the country’s leftwing and centre-left parties have both been subverted by rightwing cabals”
    We stand corrected.

  • Andy P


    I’m afraid the line you’re taking is the argument that Tony Blair offered i.e. ‘we’re the only show in town’.

    This is the reason that is similarly offerred by beaten wives who stay with their partners.

    When in power, Labour offered neo-liberal economics on steroids. In opposition they are doing the same, warily hanging new clothes on it to con the same swathe of people who were betrayed the last time round into thinking that, somehow, ‘they have learned from their mistakes’.

    Nothing will change until we start looking beyong these three political parties and perhaps beyond political parties altogether.

  • mike cobley

    MJ – sorry, but you dont get away with that sneer. Do you or do you not believe that the Blair/Brown project and/or the Clegg/Laws ascendancy constitute rightwing cabals? Yes or no?

  • MJ

    Mike Cobley: yes I do. I also believe that as a consequence the three main parties are essentially the same. And that they’re neocon.

  • Abe Rene

    If the major political parties don’t represent the people, why not form your own? Perhaps writing your own Manifesto, which is of sufficiently well-thought out and argued to be regarde well by qualified experts in relevant sciences, as well as understandable by voters will be a good test of your ability to do this.

    Here’s one example: explain Quantitative Easing in a way that does not make one think either of conspiracy crackpots, or someone swilling a bottle of laxative.

  • Abe Rene

    If the major political parties don’t represent the people, why not form your own? Perhaps writing your own Manifesto, which is sufficiently well thought out and argued, to be regarded well by qualified experts in relevant sciences, as well as understandable by voters, will be a good test of your ability to do this.

    Here’s one example: explain Quantitative Easing in a way that does not make one think either of conspiracy crackpots, or someone swilling a bottle of laxative.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Comments are closed.