When did the Tory Radicals join the party?
There is a horrifying school of thought in some parts of the party. Its one which has more to do with Toryism than liberalism. It basically runs along the lines that poor people are thick, feckless and don’t have any aspirations, so we must force them to behave in a ‘good’ manner.
I’ve had it said to me in a debate about school meals (we should make children eat healthy meals because the poor can’t help but choose bad quality food), its coming out in debates about schools (schools in poor areas are bad because poor children are disruptive and don’t want to learn).
It is not only wrong, it is a disgusting view. It is a sort of social determinism which liberals fought against. It is the creed of the Tory Radical – the poor must be looked after by their ‘betters’.
Socialists take a similar view – the state, or possibly community, must be responsible for people and tell them what to do because they can’t look after themselves.
It is the policy of the nanny state, it is ultimately the policy of the authoritarian and is in my opinion morally equivalent to racialism.
We are meant to be liberals, that is we should be treating everyone as an individual and seeking to give them freedom and opportunity and trusting them to make their own choices. Instead we so often tell them what to do and admonish them for not doing what ‘is best’.
Thankfully most of the party is not like this, at least most of the time (although on alcohol and drugs the two leadership contenders seem to be like this).
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
November 16th, 2007 at 2:50 pm
“I’ve had it said to me in a debate about school meals (we should make children eat healthy meals because the poor can’t help but choose bad quality food), its coming out in debates about schools (schools in poor areas are bad because poor children are disruptive and don’t want to learn).”
That does sound very much like unreformed Tory snobbery.
Unfortunately they are bad arguments for otherwise good things (schools in poor areas often need more help, because family income often has a significant impact), and healthy school meals could be the only healthy food children get because healthy food costs more and is harder to find in poorer areas.
Diet has a significant impact on childrens (and adults) behaviour and development – Schools are a reasonable place to limit availability of what is bad for children – you don’t want alcohol or recreational drugs in school, so why allow junk food?
November 16th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
There is nothing wrong with putting good food in front of less well off kids and encouraging them to eat it. You have to recognise that there are a lot of parents out there who genuinely don’t know that they’re feeding their children sh*t which is killing them.
I’m all for freedom to choose but I’m also very much for a sensible policy of giving people sound advice and support. That seems to me to be at the very hart of everything I stand for as a LD, which is equality of opportunity.
November 16th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Aaron Trevena and “wit and wisdom”, it’s so reassuring to know that there are such wise and benevolent people like you, willingly ready to rule the ignorant mobs as enlightened despots for their own good.
November 16th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
Firstly, the food isn’t killing them, that’s massive over reaction.
Secondly, there’s a massive difference between offering free healthy school meals and forcing people to eat them. The former should be up to the school, the second overrides the parent’s wishes, and since the parent is not abusing the child, there is no reason to.
I see no relation to equality of opportunity either. Forcing people to act in a certain way removes the opportunity to act in a different manner.
Offering food is fine from that point of view, forcing it is not.
November 16th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
I think what people forget in the poverty/food debate is the basic issue of money.
Go into your local supermarket and look at what is cheapest. If you are a single mother working part-time and all your money is going towards ever increasing fuel costs, clothes for the kids and other things such as tumble drying your clothes at the laundrette through winter, you are not going to be left with much for food.
So what are the options?
If you’ll notice in society sh*t food is also the cheapest – never mind all that Jamie Oliver c*ap – bags of chips and fishfingers are always on special offers – which in turn encourages people to buy more of the c*ap…
But you do have a point – my parents were sh*t poor in a council house but fed me extraordinarily healthy food the likes of which i wouldn’t know even how to get hold of now!!!