Danny Kruger's Conservatism of individuals, families and communities

Social decay is Britain's most serious weakness says Danny Kruger in a pamphlet entitled 'On Fraternity' to be published tomorrow by the Civitas think tank:

"Hundreds of local institutions, non-commercial and quasi-commercial, were swept away in the flood of reform. Small high-street grocers and bakers disappeared. Family-run pubs were subsumed into giant chains. Whitehall desolated local government, and turned a blind eye to the steady erosion of the family and civil society by the cult of individual freedom.  This trend has grown greatly since the Conservatives left office. The emptiness in our culture is apparent in the rates of family breakdown and the prevalence of drug addiction and violent, alcohol-fuelled crime; in the neglect of the old and the precocious sexuality of children; in the cult of vicarious narcissism which is ‘reality TV’; in the popular addiction to shopping as a means of self-definition, and in the astronomical scale of private debt which is necessary to maintain the shopping habit. It is also apparent, conversely, in the receptive hearing which militant Islam gets from young Asians in Britain, and in the hostility to Asians among young whites."

Danny's views matter - not just because they are tightly-argued - but because he is David Cameron's special adviser.  Since he joined the leader's office last summer there has been a noticeable strengthening of the party leadership's commitment to reverse the decline of voluntary association and of the family unit.  Danny - along with David Willetts, Iain Duncan Smith and Steve Hilton - are emerging as the leading advocates of a 'Social Conservatism' of the kind Margaret Thatcher, according to her autobiography, most regretted never developing.

'On Fraternity' identifies three key trends that are driving society apart:

1. The emergence of a generation of left-behinds: "Some millions of people find themselves falling behind as the rest of society advances, and unable to change their lot; the consequence, in some hundreds of communities, is endemic debt, depression, drugs, alcoholism, crime, and, cause and effect of all of these, family breakdown."
2. A collapse of intergenerational relationships: "The vast army of the retired and soon-to-retire are in conflict with our increasingly strident and alienated youth, not only for material resources and political power, but also – just as important – for cultural airtime and national respect."
3. Cultural differences including "the presence of large communities with different national origins and, therefore, alternative cultural traditions."

Danny first set out his thinking on fraternity in an article for Prospect magazine last August.  In his Civitas paper he sets out the vision of the kind of Britain he wants to see:

"Rather than the large, uniform outposts of central government, imagine a community populated by small, variable, local institutions, responding not to central direction but to local demand. Imagine a neighbourhood in which the schools, medical centres and welfare agencies are governed by local people; imagine if each county’s police force were accountable not to the Home Office but to the people of the county itself. Imagine if social action were not the responsibility of what Alexis de Tocqueville, writing about the increasingly centralised European states of his day, called ‘a powerful stranger called the government’, but of individuals, families and communities themselves."

Editor's note: "I count Danny as a friend and I certainly find his vision very appealing.  David Cameron's commitment to social responsibility is one of the most promising themes of his leadership.  My worry is that David Cameron has already failed one of his first big tests on this issue.  He chose to impose gay equality legislation on Catholic adoption agencies.  This will not encourage voluntary organisations to become more involved in delivery of social action if they know that they are likely to become clients of the state and its values.  The small platoons that Danny seeks to champion must also be free platoons if they are not to replicate the failed procedures and mindsets of the state's welfare agencies.  Freedom of groups to associate must live in tension with freedom of other individuals to live in certain ways.  On the plus side, however, David Cameron's willingness to champion the importance of marriage - society's bedrock social institution - shows real seriousness."

Related link: David Brooks could be a new guru for David Cameron

Comments

[Tom]

He is right but to fix it the sources of disciplne need to be replaced. We cannot have a society of 'victims' as we do now. The PC blame culture has to be replaced with 'responsibilities' not 'rights'. What Thatcher achieved in terms of motivation for teh economically/socially active has to be replicated for those who see no future.

As we all know a problem cannot be solved ubtil it is properly identified. The liberal policies of the past 10-15 years have clearly failed but I hear nobody saying this. Its no good defending the liberal status quo for fear of being classed 'reactionary or same old Tory" which is the current situation.

We need to return the school system to one that gives the best education to each child, not one that worries about equality to the detriment of the entire system.

Kids need ambition to perform, not told they must stay in a school system that has already failed them until 18.

The welfare state, the widening wealth gap and the lack of discipline in all aspects of public life must be reversed before those with the greatest propensity to 'fail" have any chance of being reformed.

This requires a wholesale rejection of current policy and direction and I do not see it from DC

[CCHQ Spy]

Well done for trying with this highminded thread Tim but people would rather have tittle-tattle on blogs!

[Tory Strategist]

I know Danny Kruger and can testify to both his integrity and his seriousness of purpose.

Danny understands that the debased nature of many contemporary social relationships is a key driver of our decline.

Sometimes this takes the form of the state interfering in the private sphere and problematising previously healthy social interactions - as in the imposition of 'diversity awareness training' and other such horrors. On other occasions it is the state withdrawing its authority - as in headteachers not being backed when they discipline badly behaved pupils or policemen turning a blind eye to hoodie intimidation for fear of being penalised by their superiors for 'insensitivity'.

What Britain needs, above all else, is a determined reassertion of common sense, as understood by Conservatives. Some noses will be put out of joint in the process but progress will never be made until the selfish, anti-social, lowlife degenerates who make life a misery - and the perverse liberals who make excuses for them - are confronted, faced down and banished.

Danny gets it.

[Jennifer Wells]

I used to enjoy Danny's pieces in The Telegraph. Mr Cameron is fortunate to have such a thoughtful adviser.

[Ash Faulkner]

This guy is very, very promising. We need to identify what conservatism is. It can't just be a simple defence of the status quo; it needs real foundations.

I think - and these thoughts aren't properly developed - that conservatism should have three pillars: 1. the value of choice; 2. the importance of community; and 3. scepticism of the state.

1 would encompass support for the market, democracy, liberty and the individual. 2 would encompass nationhood, the rule of law, and, most importantly, social responsibility, which I think should be the Conservative answer to state control that is still key to the Labour Party. Localism could also come under this. 3 would tie in with the other two: a hostility to overbearing regulation and law, statism and centralisation, etc.

What must be made clear is that we are not a libertarian party: "two cheers for capitalism" and all that. Simple liberalism is not enough, it needs to be balanced with a sense of duty and community: social responsibility.

I think the real ideological problem is how we reconcile One Nation Conservatism with Liberal Conservatism: the idea that we a) have a duty to eachother and b) have the righ to be free. A sense of social responsibility, within the context of a liberal society, could quite possibly be the answer to the problem that has long vexed us.

[HW]

Can I just say that all this stuff about Small high-street grocers and bakers disappearing is great if you don't mind paying for it.

You can't easily drive into most town centers and it's even more difficult to park for any length of time. It takes longer, it costs more, and the choice of products is more limited. Give me a super massive Tesco any day of the week. Going shopping at 10pm is also pretty cool if you don't like crowds.

[Simon Chapman]

Danny is right. The party needs to take localism much more seriously than it does.

It is engaging with localism in policing - elected sherrifs is a step in the right direction. It is failing to do so with health: we need either elected hospital boards or to bring local commissioning under the control of local government. That means that we will need to start being more grown-up about "postcode lotteries" or protesting that "politics should be kept out of the NHS". Local politicians should make local and accountable decisions about how best to apply finite resources in their area.

[EML]

Encouraging stuff. I think Cameron's determination to back the Government's pro-homosexual regulations and to vote against the reform of the probation service was merely short-term politics (i.e. wanting to give the impression of "moderate" and "modern" tolerance) rather than any indication of long-term policy. At least I hope so.

[David Sergeant]

There seems to be an asumption that people like local community arrangements. However, most statistics suggest otherwise as local community organisations steadily lose their membership;- churches, clubs, trade unions (even), W.I., political parties. I don't know why this is happening but it would be worth some research.

There is the old idea of carrot and stick to "encourage" people. For example, during the Tories 18 years there was a steady rise in exam pass rates. Diehard right wing papers refused to believe children were getting cleverer and blamed lower pass standards which at the time research indicated standards were not falling (apart from maths and calculators). I really liked our local Director of Education's explanation; he said that the onset of Thatcherism with its insistance on real jobs instead of so many union protected jobs meant children realised they had to pass exams if they wanted jobs in the future. Any ideas about local community activities needs a stick, i.e. if you don't join in you will lose out even on a national basis.

[matt wright]

Good debate. I think there are only 2 pillars of Conservatism - Freedom and Responsibility. The two working together hold a healthy, growing society together. One without the other causes society to fall apart. That is why I am excited by the "social responsibility" agenda as it is the key issue the country needs to address to move forward again. As a party what we need to do is refine and exercise this approach so that people clearly understand what we stand for and what Conservatism is in the 21st Century. The state cannot direct these things, Conservatism can empoer communities to achieve these things for themsleves. That is why we are different and that is what the difference is that should matter for all voters today,

Matt

[malcolm]

One reason David may be that so many people work far from where they live. Like so many others I commute to London from a distance 55 miles out.Having local interests is quite difficult if you don't get home after 7.30 pm particularly if you have a young family as I do.
I've huge admiration for those who get involved in local groups, charities and councils to improve their local areas. Hopefully after May 3rd I'll be able to join them.

[Rupert Butler]

Mr Kruger’s critique of our society and his vision of a better version are persuasive. Until we read the full article, we do not gather much idea of a practical solution to our problems. May I offer one ?

I suggest that we invent a freelance state contractor to do in social terms what the GP does in medical terms. I propose that responsible citizens take on the duties of a semi-official role-model, councillor or Critical Friend to everybody that is financially dependent on the state or is in trouble with the law. These volunteers should be paid ungenerously. They would be expected to cooperate with each other to strengthen the communal interest in the citizenship of the individuals they are working with.

If anyone is interested in this proposition, I could send them a bit of an essay on the subject.