through europe - peters-eng

Weaponising Workfare

Aaron Peters — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 12:06:39 +0000

The potential list of objectionable adjectives that have been extended to the medley of policies collectively understood as ‘workfare’ is, much like any credibility once invested in the present coalition government, indubitably nearing the point of expiry. Indeed workfare, and its present puppeteer the Home Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, are now not not only regarded as mad, bad and malicious but alsothoroughly inept. Surely even ‘IDS’ thought the numbers, the returns on government ‘investment’ in awarding these deals to A4E and others would not be so precociously dreadful as to place the programs beyond the parameters of any credible defence?

The contribution of groups such asBoycott Workfare,DPAC and Solfed, among others, in discrediting workfare programmes is impressive. At the same time such a contribution has undoubtedly been embedded within a defensive approach that has come to characterize anti-austerity struggles throughout the OECD. At times, as with workfare, such a response can be impressive. The student movement of 2010 was similarly a defensive struggle but was nonetheless possessed of admirable flexibility, scale and intensity. The same is true, indeed to a greater extent, with the ultimately victorious Quebecois student movement of the last two years, impressively coordinated byClasse. Conversely the UK ‘pensions fightback’ by public sector unions in 2011, again essentially defensive, shared few if any of these qualities. This is for a variety of reasons and has nothing to do with the intelligence or integrity of those involved, nor the quantity or quality of legitimate grievances they possessed. Indeed for all its scale, tenacity and openness the UK student movement of 2010 likewise failed to achieve its objectives or indeed really catalyse a larger movement beyond itself - although in retrospect it undoubtedly undermined any credible argument the coalition could communicate about its ambition to ‘share’ the burden of austerity.

Olympic Britishness and the crisis of identity

Aaron Peters — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 11:54:37 +0000

As Team GB entered the Olympic stadium during the opening ceremony on Friday night, it was to David Bowie’s ‘Heroes’. The central line from the song struck me as summing up the country’s hopes for its sportswomen and men amid a double-dip recession and seemingly terminal economic inertia - ‘We can be heroes, just for one day’. A concession in the choice of song perhaps that the Olympics represent a temporary, if somewhat spectacular, distraction from an increasingly dire reality that can only intensify over the forthcoming years.

Something of a debate has broken out about the meaning of this extraordinary ceremony, not least here on OurKingdom with Anthony Barnett and Sunder Katwala. The New York Times called it “...neither a nostalgic sweep through the past nor a bold vision of a brave new future”. This struck me as an accurate summation of an event that presented in microcosm the present historical moment in the wake of the global financial crisis of 2008 and the social and economic malaise that has followed. I was reminded of the quote by Antonio Gramsci on crisis in its consisting“...precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot yet be born”. It is similar sentiments that informed the mixed nature of London's opening ceremony, which looked neither wholly forward nor back.

The Life of Vaclav Havel: Saint from the End of History

Aaron Peters — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:02:44 +0000

“...no one of my generation will ever forget those powerful scenes from Wenceslas Square two decades ago. Havel led the Czech people out of tyranny. And he helped bring freedom and democracy to our entire continent.”
David Cameron 2011

 “There is no real evidence that Western democracy, that is, democracy of the traditional parliamentary type, can offer solutions that are any more profound. It may even be said that the more room there is in the Western democracies (compared to our world) for the genuine aims of life, the better the crisis is hidden from people and the more deeply do they become immersed in it.”
Vaclav Havel 1978

“...you [Foucault] were the first to teach us a fundamental lesson… the indignity of speaking for others”
Deleuze on Foucault

Flee the state, don't seize it! A response to the idea of 'citizen politicians' in UK government

Aaron Peters — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 16:12:03 +0000

Andreas Whittam-Smith recently wrote about the possibility of 'a group of like-minded citizens running for election for one term only' in order to bring about the requisite change that is patently needed within British politics and which, it seems increasingly clear, is not forthcoming from career politicians within the bowels of the palace of Westminster. His proposal, therefore, was one in which a better group of persons would in part replace the current cohort, as inept and frequently corrupt as they seem to be. This would be in the hope that improved personnel might be more effective 'problem-solvers' while also mediating a crisis of confidence in our democratic institutions which are, we are often told, of central importance in British public life and whose redemption is seemingly necessary.

As was the case with Guy Aitchison's response to the piece I am certainly sympathetic with the basic proposal and it is clear that, as Guy writes, '...the British elite stand politically, morally and ideologically bankrupt'. This is a basic point. Those contributing within the piece, myself and vast swathes of the British population share a common ground – that something has to change. This is an increasingly evident point, but also a basic premise upon which meaningful social and political change can and might be built. The institutions which govern, rule and represent us are failing at every turn.

Reproduction of movement(s) without organisation: #UKUncut, #OWS, #OccupyMovement

Aaron Peters — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:06:13 +0000

October 15th 2011 saw a global mobilization of political protest. It took place using limited resources, in a short time-frame and with minimal involvement from institutional actors. Demonstrators staged rallies around the world on every major continent from Auckland to Tapei to Madrid and Seattle: in total there were some 951 actions in 82 countries.

In terms of global reach and the involvement of provincial cities (not just capitals) the scale of collective action was possibly without precedent, surpassing even the globally coordinated anti-war demonstrations of March 20th 2003. This staggering feat was achieved without institutional actors such as political parties and in some countries, including the UK, without the involvement of the organised labour movement.