[p2p-research] Red Tories

[Tom Rawlings]

This is a write-up of an event I attended in Bristol recently. I've 
added this to the blog scheduled for the 6th May...

Ta.


The event was a discussion around the idea of a Red Tory 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Tory> (Tory being the common term for 
a political conservative) between the author of the book ‘Red Tory’, 
Philip Blond <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillip_Blond> and the 
political philosopher John Gray <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_N._Gray>.

The talk began with Philip Blond stating his position: The Red Tory 
position is that of economic radicalism and social conservatism. The 
political Left has failed the poor because individualism favoured the 
educated. The political right has failed because monopolised markets 
dis-empower people. A Red Tory is opposed to state centralisation, to 
looks to allow people the ability to create institutions. However if we 
are against state authoritarianism then we must also be against rampant 
individualism. The political Left and Right have both brought into 
individualism. Both positions oscillate between extremes of power to the 
state/individualism and ignore, indeed lead to the breakage of human and 
local relations. Blond said that religion is a force for cohesion around 
the shared values of the ‘transcendent’. A Red Tory allows people to 
create institutions that are non-profit, to run services (however they 
could be passed to private companies

Then went to a conversation between the two…

John Gray asked the question about if Blond’s ideas were realistic to 
reverse not only the post-1945 Labour settlement (that established the 
welfare state and the National Health Service) and also the legacy of 
Thatcherism <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thatcherism>?

Blond replied that this is the only way. The current methods have 
failed. Both the state and monopolised markets have failed so the market 
of groups is the only solution.

Gray then asked that if we reject current politics are we not also 
rejecting who we are? We are a society built on differences but with a 
shared tolerance.

Blond replied that too much diversity leads to atomisation. That we need 
shared values to stabilise us. Real liberty comes from common believes.

Gray said that Blond’s suggestion of religion is a binding concept, how 
would this work as Britain is a post-Christian society?

Blond replied that transcendent is about that which can’t be known so in 
the unknown lives diversity. Universality is in our cognition. The idea 
of a common good can be shared by secular world.

Gray remarked that he is confident that nothing of this program will 
happen. That it is just a rehash of old ideas of redistribution.

Blond countered that it will. The Tories have adopted it as policy.

Question from the audience about how the Red Tory would approach Climate 
Change. Blond stated the the biggest opposition to action on climate 
change came from the poor. He then suggested the example of individual 
carbon accounts for people as solution for climate change which gives 
the poor an asset that they have never had. Assets are true source of 
wealth: while recent report on inequality put income at 10:1 while asset 
difference is 100:1.

/My thoughts:/ There is some interesting ideas being bashed around here. 
It is hard to see how the Red Tory would avoid the monopolised market 
from creeping into the the people-created institution, thus creating a 
new phase of privatisation in the mould that has already been shown to 
fail are helping the poor. In addition the opposition to action on 
climate change, I would contend that most opposition comes more from 
existing vested interests (e.g. coal, gas and oil industries) than from 
the poor. However the concept of the current structure of the welfare 
state dis-empowering people is something worth more thought.

Jonathan Raban was very scathing of the idea in a recent review of the 
book <http://www.lrb.co.uk/v32/n08/jonathan-raban/camerons-crank/print>:

    Stripped of its obscurantist rhetoric and foggy sermonising, Red
    Tory issues a moral licence to government to free itself from the
    expensive business of dispensing social services and to dump them on
    the ‘third sector’ of charities, voluntary organisations,
    non-profits and the like. It won’t make Britain a more virtuous,
    civil, courteous or moral society. It certainly won’t restore us to
    that happy state of grace and comity in which, apparently, we all
    lived in medieval times.

-- 
Tomas

-----------------------
Tomas Rawlings
Development Director, FluffyLogic Development Ltd.
web: www.fluffylogic.net
tel: 0117 9442233 
-
Also see:
blog on film & interweb: www.plugincinema.com
blog on p2p, media ecology & evolution: blog.catbot.org
tweet: www.twitter.com/arclightfire