Monday, 25 January 2010
The Politics of "Change"
From Times Online
The Times Online
June 27, 2007
This was 2007 - now is 2010, and yet Gordon Brown is still promising change. The only changes which have taken place over the past 12 years are superficial and negative. David Cameron also promises change because "it cannot go on like this". Barack Obama spoke about change when he became President of the United States. All politicians try to convince the electorate of the urgent need for change. Yes, change is necessary but what often happens is: no change but more of the same. In Britain the gap between the wealthy and the poor in society has not changed since the New Labour government came into power, despite the claims by the government that they have helped the worst off people in society.
Mere reform is not the answer to the needs of society. The fundamental changes which society needs to meet the challenges of the present century amount to a "velvet revolution". The constitutional changes which are needed are outlined in the posting below (The Conservative Government Time-Bomb). This change needs to come from within, starting with a rejection of the anti-social values instigated by the present government without taking heed of public approval, and contributing to national debate on the best way to effect changes in society.
This national debate should take place in assemblies and parliaments across the British Isles as well as in grass-roots organisations and in the media. The quest is for a better quality of life based on eternal values which have stood the test of time. They should not be classed as religious or secular, but based on natural human values which are universal to mankind. They should range from the constitutional to the economic, from the social to the international, and should involve all those who care for the creation of a just and equitable society. "Change" is the political in-word of the pre-election period but to mean anything at all it must be realised and produce the results which the members of electorate wish for to make a difference in their day-to-day existence.
Further reading: http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/aint/507.htm
"More revealing still was the Labour leader’s view of what the election should be about. Not a referendum on the Government's past performance, he said, but an examination of two competing policies for the future. He accused Cameron of "flim flam, PR, and not really having changed"."
Adam Boulton -Sky News
Gordon Brown says that Bob Ainsworth was talking about the council elections on May 6th,
not the general election. Is he going on to the bitter end?
He asks people to forget the past - Labour's past performance (or lack of it) is not in question.
Isn't it? Does that mean that change is irrelevant?