Yesterday’s story about
the government minister who suggested that people who are struggling to get by
should work longer hours or get a better job tells us a lot about the
underlying philosophy of the current government, and is a form of
victim-blaming. If people are unable to get by on their income, this is,
apparently, not because employers are underpaying them, nor is it anything to
do with legislation which allows employers to pay less than a living wage, or
the actions of the benefits agency in threatening to withhold benefits from
people who don’t take low-paid work. No, according to the Tory gospel, it’s their
own fault for staying in poorly-paid employment. Whilst there was something of
a grudging admission that changing jobs or working longer hours wouldn’t work
for everyone, the way the exception was phrased suggests a belief that it is
indeed the answer for most.
The idea that people can and should better
themselves with no need for legislation or assistance is a key fallacy of Tory
ideology, but it lies behind a lot of their thinking, and deliberately
conflates the idea of ‘anybody’ with ‘everybody’. As a general rule (although
there are always some exceptions), it is true that ‘anyone’ can get a better
job, just as ‘anyone’ can become a successful billionaire entrepreneur. And
their idea of social justice is based on that idea that opportunities are equal,
with its concomitant that anyone who doesn’t do either or both of those things
therefore has only themselves to blame. Poverty, in their eyes, is the fault of
the poor themselves; people who do not enjoy ‘success’ are just life’s losers.
But here’s the point: whilst it’s true that ‘anyone’ can get a better job or
become a billionaire, it doesn’t follow that ‘everyone’ can. Indeed it would be
impossible for ‘everyone’ to do so. Whilst some doors might theoretically be
open to ‘anyone’, we know that only a limited number can pass through them
before the room becomes full. We also know that which people pass through them
isn’t simply a matter of individual determination; there’s also a good amount
of luck involved, to say nothing of the individual’s background.
Let us take as an example, a certain B
Johnson, currently the temporary resident of number 10, Downing Street. In
theory, anyone in the UK could have ended up living at his current address, but
given his limited ability, his utter inconsistency, and his penchant for lies,
would he be in the same place today had he been brought up on a council estate?
Would he have ever gone to Eton? And without going to Eton, would he ever have
got into Oxford? And without both of those things happening, would the
Conservative Party ever have endorsed a man (let alone a woman) with such
a cavalier disregard for the law and for truth, who is known to have conspired
with another to have a journalist beaten up, and who has been fired from two jobs
for lying, as a
candidate for parliament, never mind for PM? Background, and more particularly parental
income and wealth, to say nothing of the consequential power relationships, matter;
they matter a lot.
It suits the Tories, though, to blame the
poor for their own plight. It suits them even better to blame the poor for the fact
that those above the poverty line are also struggling. From their perspective,
it’s far better for the not-so-well-off to blame the even poorer for their
situation than to encourage them to look at where the power and wealth are
being increasingly concentrated. The words of the hapless minister yesterday
weren’t a mistake or a slip of the tongue, they were part of a deliberate
culture of victim-blaming. One thing that is entirely the fault of those of us
who are not part of their priviliged elite is allowing them to get away with
it.
No comments:
Post a Comment