By Jesse Norman and Janan Ganesh
(Published by Policy Exchange, June 2006)
Reviewed by Henry Curteis
Like
many Conservatives observing Cameron’s first months as Party leader, I’ve been
unsure, and on occasions uneasy about him. The only consistent thing he’s been saying is that we are to expect
‘change’. He’s indicated that General
Well Being (GWB) is in his view more important then GDP, and he’s quoted as
saying that ‘Compassionate Conservatism..is right for our times and our
country.’ So what is this Compassionate
Conservatism (CC) all about, and does the new book with that title by Jesse
Norman and Janan Ganesh of Policy Exchange unlock the Cameron puzzle?
After
reading the summarised version of CC on CH, I approached the text with a
certain amount of cynicism. The ideas
sounded as if they were expressed in terms that would mean more to students of
political philosophy than people from the real world. The term Compassionate Conservatism to my ear
is pretentious, and has the presumption that Conservatism is on occasions not
compassionate. Is CC a bit of rebranding,
to go with the iceberg and the bicycle, I wondered? Putting aside such negative thoughts, I read
the text.
The
statistical presentation is simple and to the point. 75% of those over 65 vote. Only 37% of 18-24 year olds do. In 1997 the State was 36-37% of GDP. By 2010 it will be 43%. Should it be permitted to keep rising to
Scandinavian levels of 50/60%, ask the authors? Public sector productivity fell by 10% between 1997 and 2003. The quantitative picture is clear enough.
The
statements that accompany the bare figures ask the reader to look deeper, and
it has to be said that the authors do not lack courage when it comes to offering
their conclusions. ‘The implicit deal by which people trade social engagement
for security..is starting to break down’ and ‘the overall picture is, in short,
not merely that the state itself is less effective than it should be. It is increasingly hard to manage at all.’ The primary theme that comes out is that ‘We
need to think beyond the State.’
That,
they claim puts CC in direct confrontation with the ideas of the current government,
which is ‘characterised by a default instinct to extend the powers of the State
over the lives of its citizens.’ They
add that ‘the extension of the state..tends to undermine the voices, the energy
and the creativity of the citizens.’
If
that was the sum total of the book, then people might wonder what all the fuss
was about, but it is the willingness of the authors to delve into original
political history and philosophy that makes CC a really interesting read. They give the flavour of Hobbes’ Social
Contract, of Oakeshott’s views of States being either civil or enterprise
societies, and they go back and see what these two did not mention, and what
they overlooked. It was inconceivable in
earlier times that States would become as powerful as modern states have
become.
In
the past Conservatism has encompassed a broad view, incorporating Liberal
Conservatism with an emphasis on free markets, localism and private property,
and Paternalistic Conservatism focused on community and social stability. But there was never the thought until now
presented here by Jesse Norman and Janan Ganesh that Conservatism may need to
go broader still and start to protect the private and public associations and
connections of individuals from state power and interference.
They
write, ‘In economic theory, people are treated as though they are purely
self-interested seekers of profit….individuals cut off from each other, who
react positively for gain and negatively to the possibility of loss.’ CC looks to see people differently, as
creating their own connections motivated inter alia by affection and personal
ties.
They
write that ‘man is a social animal, people are not merely sterile economic
agents, and they create institutions of extraordinary range and diversity.’
The
Left believes that ‘Only the State has the power to stand up for people against
the Market’ but as CC writes, ‘In equating social justice with redistribution
and state spending on the public services, it has tacitly adopted a grossly
inadequate conception of society itself.’
When
Cameron says that there is such a thing as society, but it’s not the same thing
as the State, he is clearly echoing the thoughts written about and described in
CC - that society is the creation of individuals, motivated to create
institutions by a myriad of different things - including natural affection, and
the loyalty of people to one another. It’s really a very human political philosophy, necessary as an antidote
to the unchecked power of the impersonal modern State.
If you cannot see Cameron’s beliefs represented in many policies yet, by reading CC which he is occasionally referencing, you will have a far clearer idea of how he approaches politics. Given the difficulty of reaching people through the filter of the media, a book like CC has a role to play in building understanding of what he stands for and how his leadership will develop in the years ahead.
Henry Curteis is a businessman/writer whose publications include ‘Entrepreneurship in a Growth Culture’, and ‘Building a Creative Culture for a Growing Organisation’ part of ‘Successful Change Strategies’, Director Books.
Compassionate Conservatism was serialised in four parts for YourPlatform, and is viewable in full here. There is also a review of the launch event in ToryDiary.
Great, and it was a very interesting discussion on this subject at "Policy Exchange" a couple of nights ago.
Finally we are moving away from "foaming at the mouth" politics and taking the time to think about and discuss the how and whys of Britain today.
Excellent. This is the best thing to happen to Conservatism for eons.
Posted by: Oberon Houston | June 16, 2006 at 12:12 PM
Tim/Sam, another very good discussion on a similar subject is "Life at the Bottom : The Worldview that Makes the Underclass" by Theodore Dalrymple.
Well worth a read.
Posted by: Oberon Houston | June 16, 2006 at 12:17 PM