David Cameron, Ed Miliband and the entire British political class came together yesterday to denounce the rioters. They were of course right to say that the actions of these looters, arsonists and muggers were abhorrent and criminal, and that the police should be given more support.
But there was also something very phony and hypocritical about all the shock and outrage expressed in parliament. MPs spoke about the week’s dreadful events as if they were nothing to do with them.
I cannot accept that this is the case. Indeed, I believe that the criminality in our streets cannot be dissociated from the moral disintegration in the highest ranks of modern British society. The last two decades have seen a terrifying decline in standards among the British governing elite. It has become acceptable for our politicians to lie and to cheat. An almost universal culture of selfishness and greed has grown up.
It is not just the feral youth of Tottenham who have forgotten they have duties as well as rights. So have the feral rich of Chelsea and Kensington. A few years ago, my wife and I went to a dinner party in a large house in west London. A security guard prowled along the street outside, and there was much talk of the “north-south divide”, which I took literally for a while until I realised that my hosts were facetiously referring to the difference between those who lived north and south of Kensington High Street.
Most of the people in this very expensive street were every bit as deracinated and cut off from the rest of Britain as the young, unemployed men and women who have caused such terrible damage over the last few days. For them, the repellent Financial Times magazine How to Spend It is a bible. I’d guess that few of them bother to pay British tax if they can avoid it, and that fewer still feel the sense of obligation to society that only a few decades ago came naturally to the wealthy and better off.
Yet we celebrate people who live empty lives like this. A few weeks ago, I noticed an item in a newspaper saying that the business tycoon Sir Richard Branson was thinking of moving his headquarters to Switzerland. This move was represented as a potential blow to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, because it meant less tax revenue.
I couldn’t help thinking that in a sane and decent world such a move would be a blow to Sir Richard, not the Chancellor. People would note that a prominent and wealthy businessman was avoiding British tax and think less of him. Instead, he has a knighthood and is widely feted. The same is true of the brilliant retailer Sir Philip Green. Sir Philip’s businesses could never survive but for Britain’s famous social and political stability, our transport system to shift his goods and our schools to educate his workers.
Yet Sir Philip, who a few years ago sent an extraordinary £1 billion dividend offshore, seems to have little intention of paying for much of this. Why does nobody get angry or hold him culpable? I know that he employs expensive tax lawyers and that everything he does is legal, but he surely faces ethical and moral questions just as much as does a young thug who breaks into one of Sir Philip’s shops and steals from it?
Our politicians – standing sanctimoniously on their hind legs in the Commons yesterday – are just as bad. They have shown themselves prepared to ignore common decency and, in some cases, to break the law. David Cameron is happy to have some of the worst offenders in his Cabinet. Take the example of Francis Maude, who is charged with tackling public sector waste – which trade unions say is a euphemism for waging war on low‑paid workers. Yet Mr Maude made tens of thousands of pounds by breaching the spirit, though not the law, surrounding MPs’ allowances.
A great deal has been made over the past few days of the greed of the rioters for consumer goods, not least by Rotherham MP Denis MacShane who accurately remarked, “What the looters wanted was for a few minutes to enter the world of Sloane Street consumption.” This from a man who notoriously claimed £5,900 for eight laptops. Of course, as an MP he obtained these laptops legally through his expenses.
Yesterday, the veteran Labour MP Gerald Kaufman asked the Prime Minister to consider how these rioters can be “reclaimed” by society. Yes, this is indeed the same Gerald Kaufman who submitted a claim for three months’ expenses totalling £14,301.60, which included £8,865 for a Bang & Olufsen television.
Or take the Salford MP Hazel Blears, who has been loudly calling for draconian action against the looters. I find it very hard to make any kind of ethical distinction between Blears’s expense cheating and tax avoidance, and the straight robbery carried out by the looters.
The Prime Minister showed no sign that he understood that something stank about yesterday’s Commons debate. He spoke of morality, but only as something which applies to the very poor:
“We will restore a stronger sense of morality and responsibility – in every town, in every street and in every estate.”
He appeared not to grasp that this should apply to the rich and powerful as well.
The tragic truth is that Mr Cameron is himself guilty of failing this test. It is scarcely six weeks since he jauntily turned up at the News International summer party, even though the media group was at the time subject to not one but two police investigations. Even more notoriously, he awarded a senior Downing Street job to the former News of the World editor Andy Coulson, even though he knew at the time that Coulson had resigned after criminal acts were committed under his editorship. The Prime Minister excused his wretched judgment by proclaiming that “everybody deserves a second chance”. It was very telling yesterday that he did not talk of second chances as he pledged exemplary punishment for the rioters and looters.
These double standards from Downing Street are symptomatic of widespread double standards at the very top of our society. It should be stressed that most people (including, I know, Telegraph readers) continue to believe in honesty, decency, hard work, and putting back into society at least as much as they take out.
But there are those who do not. Certainly, the so-called feral youth seem oblivious to decency and morality. But so are the venal rich and powerful – too many of our bankers, footballers, wealthy businessmen and politicians.
Of course, most of them are smart and wealthy enough to make sure that they obey the law. That cannot be said of the sad young men and women, without hope or aspiration, who have caused such mayhem and chaos over the past few days. But the rioters have this defence: they are just following the example set by senior and respected figures in society. Let’s bear in mind that many of the youths in our inner cities have never been trained in decent values. All they have ever known is barbarism. Our politicians and bankers, in sharp contrast, tend to have been to good schools and universities and to have been given every opportunity in life.
Something has gone horribly wrong in Britain. If we are ever to confront the problems which have been exposed in the past week, it is essential to bear in mind that they do not only exist in inner-city housing estates.
The culture of greed and impunity we are witnessing on our TV screens stretches right up into corporate boardrooms and the Cabinet. It embraces the police and large parts of our media. It is not just its damaged youth, but Britain itself that needs a moral reformation.
Lire aussi:
Muslims tackle looters and bigots
There is a lively debate taking place in the UK media between left and right wing commentators as to the causes of the English riots, in which hundreds of shops and businesses have been looted. However, both sides agree that the looting has been inexcusable. I hope both sides will also agree with me that Muslims have played an important role in helping to tackle the looting and preserve public safety. This would be an especially important acknowledgment if it came from those Islamophobic commentators who consistently denigrate Muslims. "When accused of terrorism we are Muslims, when killed by looters, we become Asian", a Muslim student explained to me. He was commenting on the media reportingof the death of three young Muslims in Birmingham on Tuesday night. Like many other Muslims, they were bravely defending shops and communities as rioters went on a violent rampage of looting. In recent days Muslim Londoners, Muslims from Birmingham, and Muslims in towns and cities around England have been at the forefront of protecting small businesses and vulnerable communities from looting. Having worked closely with Muslim Londoners, first as a police officer and more recently as a researcher, for the last ten years this commendable bravery comes as no surprise to me. But their example of outstanding civic duty in support of neighbours is worth highlighting - especially when sections of the UK media are so quick to print negative headlines about Muslims on the flimsiest of pretexts.
Muslims tackle looters and bigots
En Angleterre, "en tant que société, nous avons échoué"
Une semaine après le début des émeutes, l'Angleterre essaie toujours de comprendre les raisons qui ont poussé des centaines de jeunes, issus de toutes les communautés, à sortir dans les rues, à casser et piller les magasins. Pour leJDD.fr, Chris Allen, sociologue à l'Université de Birmingham et auteur en 2010 du très remarqué Islamophobia, analyse la situation. L'universitaire insiste notamment sur l'origine sociale de ces émeutes.
Comment qualifier ce mouvement?
Nous avons une tradition historique en Grande-Bretagne des mouvements sociaux. Mais cette fois-ci, ce qui est assez unique, c'est qu'il s'agit d'un phénomène multiculturel. Parmi les pilleurs, il y avait des noirs, des Indiens, des Pakistanais, des blancs. Ils reflétaient vraiment la jeunesse anglaise. Quelles sont leur motivation?
En tant que groupe, ces individus ne sont pas politiquement mobilisés. Ils n'ont pas d'agenda politique. Ils veulent défier l'autorité de la police. Ce sont des émeutes de la consommation. Mais cela ne veut pas dire qu'il n'y a pas une analyse politique de ce mouvement à faire, car ces émeutes reflètent ce qu'il se passe dans la société. Peut-on parler de conflit social?
Il y a trente ans, Margaret Thatcher décrétait la fin de la société. Depuis, on s'est concentré sur l'individu. Mais pendant ce temps-là, le fossé entre les riches et les pauvres n'a cessé d'augmenter. Nous avons aujourd'hui toute une génération sans espoir, touchée par le chômage et l'absence d'éducation. Ces jeunes pensent qu'ils n'ont pas de place, pas de rôle dans la société britannique. En tant que société, nous avons échoué. Nous sommes très forts pour dire que les gens qui vivent dans ces quartiers sont des paresseux irresponsables qui vivent sur le dos du système. Nous nous sommes contentés de mettre la poussière sous le tapis. Mais elle est toujours là. Quand les choses vont bien, il est très facile pour nous collectivement d'ignorer ce qu'il se passe. Mais quand les choses vont mal, qu'on connait la récession et le chômage, qu'on met en place de sévères coupes budgétaires dans les services sociaux, on réalise à quel point nous sommes confrontés à un sérieux problème. «En Grande-Bretagne, la question des classes sociales est devenue taboue.»Selon David Cameron, le multiculturalisme à l'anglaise a échoué, en encourageant chaque communauté à vivre séparée les unes des autres et en effaçant le sentiment d'identité nationale. Qu'en pensez-vous?
Ces émeutes prouvent exactement le contraire! Toutes les communautés se sont retrouvées ensemble dans la rue. Si vous vous baladez dans Birmingham, vous voyez que toutes les communautés travaillent et vivent ensemble. Nous sommes totalement multiculturels. En revanche, ce n'est pas la notion même de multiculturalisme qu'il faut questionner mais la manière dont les politiques l'ont géré. Ils se sont concentrés sur les communautés minoritaires au détriment de la communauté majoritaire. Or, le multiculturalisme, c'est respecter les différences sans faire de différence. De fait, la communauté blanche a l'impression d'avoir été délaissée. |
