To the barricades! (but don't forget your wallets)
The next couple of weeks should offer a couple of interesting, and contrasting, tests of political reactions. It's going to be interesting to see how many of the people who condemn strike action by tube workers suddenly getting all misty-eyed about the power of direct action when asked to do the same to the fuel protestors, and vice versa of course.
Firstly, there's the RMT Tube strike on election day next week which instantly becomes this year's number one on the political 'and how much crack did you have to take to make that seem like a good idea?' chart. Let's face it, out of the candidates for Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone's their best friend (well, amongst candidates who stand a chance of winning somewhere other than Bizarro-world) and, as Anthony Wells points out today, calling a strike on election day is basically giving Simon Hughes and Steve Norris twovery big sticks to beat Livingstone with for the next seven days. The RMT score 10 points for letting the public know of their legitimate grievances and lose several million for failing to engage their brains at any point along the line.
(And as someone suggested to me in an email this afternoon - giving what everyone said after Spain's elections, if people don't vote for Labour on June 10th, does that mean the Unions have won?)
Then, of course, there's the fuel protestors who are threatening to throw their toys out of their pram and supposedly cause chaos across the country all in the name of their own selfishness. Hopefully, someone within the Government will have taken notes after 2000 and remembered that the supposed 'power' of the fuel protestors came about only because the oil companies - who in other countries have no qualms about arranging for people obstructing their business to be shot - panic when they see three fat blokes sitting outside their depots and refuse to send their tankers out. You know, someone more cynical than good old idealistic optimistic me might think that they were deliberately causing the crisis, using the protests as a convenient smokescreen, to get the government to lower taxes so they could raise their profits. But that would be far too cynical, right?
And should these protests come about, would it be possible for one journalist to ask all the protesting farmers why they're complaining when their agricultural fuel is vastly cheaper? And when they complain about the costs of transportation after it leaves the farm, could someone explain just why the supposedly hyper-efficient free market, which solves all problems, thinks the best way to distribute food is to send the same produce on several hundred miles of criss-crossing journeys across the country?
Yet agin, it seems that stupidity and selfishness are going to win the day. Oh, doesn't it make you so proud to be English?
Firstly, there's the RMT Tube strike on election day next week which instantly becomes this year's number one on the political 'and how much crack did you have to take to make that seem like a good idea?' chart. Let's face it, out of the candidates for Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone's their best friend (well, amongst candidates who stand a chance of winning somewhere other than Bizarro-world) and, as Anthony Wells points out today, calling a strike on election day is basically giving Simon Hughes and Steve Norris twovery big sticks to beat Livingstone with for the next seven days. The RMT score 10 points for letting the public know of their legitimate grievances and lose several million for failing to engage their brains at any point along the line.
(And as someone suggested to me in an email this afternoon - giving what everyone said after Spain's elections, if people don't vote for Labour on June 10th, does that mean the Unions have won?)
Then, of course, there's the fuel protestors who are threatening to throw their toys out of their pram and supposedly cause chaos across the country all in the name of their own selfishness. Hopefully, someone within the Government will have taken notes after 2000 and remembered that the supposed 'power' of the fuel protestors came about only because the oil companies - who in other countries have no qualms about arranging for people obstructing their business to be shot - panic when they see three fat blokes sitting outside their depots and refuse to send their tankers out. You know, someone more cynical than good old idealistic optimistic me might think that they were deliberately causing the crisis, using the protests as a convenient smokescreen, to get the government to lower taxes so they could raise their profits. But that would be far too cynical, right?
And should these protests come about, would it be possible for one journalist to ask all the protesting farmers why they're complaining when their agricultural fuel is vastly cheaper? And when they complain about the costs of transportation after it leaves the farm, could someone explain just why the supposedly hyper-efficient free market, which solves all problems, thinks the best way to distribute food is to send the same produce on several hundred miles of criss-crossing journeys across the country?
Yet agin, it seems that stupidity and selfishness are going to win the day. Oh, doesn't it make you so proud to be English?
Nick got away with this at 8:29 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home