Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Cameron to solve age-old problem

'In the annual Hugo Young lecture in London, Mr Cameron is expected to match Labour's pledge to eradicate child poverty by the end of the decade.'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8351744.stm

I know its a political pledge and therefore means almost nothing, but I couldn't help the thought that popped into my head- Matthew 26:11. 'For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.'

UPDATE

"...Our alternative to big government is the big society, but we understand that the big society is not just going to spring to life on its own: we need strong and concerted government action to make it happen. We need to use the state to remake society."

Lenin, Karl Marx, George Bernard Shaw and Mao Tse Tung are sitting in hell grinning from ear to ear.

2 comments:

Sophist said...

"Lenin, Karl Marx, George Bernard Shaw and Mao Tse Tung are sitting in hell grinning from ear to ear."

"Conservatives are recognizable as political animals partly ... by their reluctance to effect any complete separation - either in theory or practice between state and civil society - ... moreover it is as deep an instinct as it is in a socialist to resist the champions of 'minimal' government,and to recognise the esence of politcs in established power"

"The Meaning of Conservatism", R. Scruton,(2001) pg 40-41

Edmund Ironside said...

Even if you wanted to 'separate the state and civil society' how would you go about it? I don't understand this point at all. Under socialism/communism, the state subsumes civil society and arrogates to itself decision-making, resources anc control. Under our representative democracies, the state doesn't. Those are different. Not the same. All I can discern from Scruton in this case is arguing for what Britain currently has. In terms of what works better and what works worse, no system on earth can compare to the US constitution, created from whole cloth. In terms of longevity, effectiveness at preventing tyranny, and being flexible enough to cope with vastly differing circumstances while protecting basic rights, no system comes close. Certainly not the British one, which is now in tatters.