The revolutionary mind

It strikes me that what drives those on the radical left most is a desire for transformation. An interesting comparison to make is with the conservative movement in America, who also strive for transformation. That is, however, a moot point. This post is more concerned with socialism.

Socialists take a look around them and see a miserable world. They see poverty, crime and racism, and deduce that these social ills are the product of socio-economic organisation. They are, in general, uncompromisingly principled, which is hugely to their credit, in a world where matieralism and consumerism appear prevalent, and such evils as racism still rear their ugly head.

I share completely the desire to create a kinder world, one free from exploitation, slavery and unabashed materialism. I also believe, however, that the best way of doing this is through radical individual thought. This involves a deep degree of individual spirituality, searching for and finding the God who is Love who is the only real force that can effect change in each one of our lives.

Deep change is nurtured through spirituality, but this is done on an individual basis and not through radical attempts to change society. Such a view is in many ways an appealing one, but it is is all too easy to believe such collective prescriptions could work. It seems to be implied that once social and economic conditions have been transformed (once revolution has kicked in) that members of society will be transformed in their attitudes and shake off the chains of their oppression. But this can never be so, surely. Changing hearts can only be done on an individual basis, not through wholesale collectivism with state-sanctioned ideologies. This is where I believe socialism errs - even if a revolutionary group were to take power, and even with sizeable support, they would still have to pull people up to fit the standard of the new socialist man. For merely be getting rid of private capital and the profit mechanism would not rid the world of greed, selfish ambition and jealously. Those are the traits that need to be countered, and not material conditions per se. What so impressed me about some pockets of the anarchist movement in Spain during the 1930s was that anarchism was to many, a way of life, a system of values, in short - a way of thinking - as well as a social ideology for the future. It is this present change from within that I think needs to be nurtured, and the view that hopefully one day society will improve subsequently dropped.

The politics of optimism

It is often thought that conservatism is the least cheerful political ideology. Of the three dominant political philosophies, with liberalism and socialism being the other two, conservatism has the undisputed reputation as the creed of the pessimist and cynic, with a belief in man's inherent imperfection and fallibility.

But there is nothing that makes this necessarily so, at least nothing in my view. And in recent decades, America witnessed a conservative President who was the very antithesis of doom and gloom. Ronald Reagan appealed to the 'fruits of the spirit', as it were, in all his public statements, expressing hopefulness and optimism as to his country's destiny.

David Cameron's election as leader of the British Conservative Party is a welcome development. Mr Cameron has not only vowed to bring an end to 'Punch and Judy' style politics, an admirable aspiration, but claims also to want to build a better Britain through encouraging the best in human nature.

So what? - you might ask. What are you getting at? - you may interject. Well, my point is this. Since 1997, we have had a government that has been enthusiastic and ambitious, but at root, I believe, wrong in its prescriptions for building a happier society. People commonly say New Labour are no different from Conservatives. But that misses a vital point, namely, that the Labour Party has engaged in a level of state activism that betrays a very different attitude towards solving society's problems than the sort of Conservatism that advocates a voluntarist, localist society. One could argue that Conservatives are the new optimists, as they are the ones advocating policies which rely on the inherent goodness within each individual.

The government has become accustomed to the view that it can solve society's problems. It cannot, nor should it be expected to, for only the people themselves can solve society's problems. This is where I believe we stand in modern Britain. It seems that the methods currently employed to fight social ills are not working, and result from an imbalance of central government. It seems that the central government's schemes, created with the best intentions, fail to be understood by ordinary people, as explemplified by the Tax Credit fiasco a few years ago.

David Cameron's Conservatives seem to be committed to supporting the people and institutions that are working at a local level, and trusting people more than government planners to have the ability to help themselves and each other. He has advocated the increased use of the voluntary sector to enable social depravation to be tackled more effectively.

This seems to me to be the proper role of government. To encourage and bring out the best in people. Not to rule from the top. This takes an optimistic view of human nature, as it stands against the view that people's activities should be regulated in any way. I think its important that we break free of the notion that government, in and of itself, is the only agency that can build a better society. Policy should create the environment for the people's natural goodness to shine through. Cameron's Conservatives seem to be developing policies in this direction.