Sign up for our
free e-newsletter

Send us your latest local news and events

Hard times highlight a better way to live

Regular Network Norwich and Norfolk columnist James Knight asks what can we get out of the recession, and what can we put back in?

Last year on Wednesday 25th February 2009 the UK Economy News printed the following statement:

“The Office for National Statistics has today stepped in to correct UK economy growth figures which were issued in 2008 which now seem to indicate a downturn in the second quarter of 2008.  The new figures show there was a marginal downturn in the second quarter, so apparently we’re led to believe that the UK recession officially started three months earlier than originally thought."

This news led to a rather awkward discomfiture for the Labour Party as the Chancellor Alistair Darling had previously hinted back in early 2008 that any UK recession would be transient.  Also in the article we had the following statement:

“The 1.9% fall in Britain's annual gross domestic product in the 12 months preceding the fourth quarter of 2008 is actually on a par with the fall in the UK economy throughout the recession of the 1990s.”

In other words, although we still find ourselves deep in the recession (with some economists predicting its end soon and others contending we are still in the middle of it), the negative effect this has had on UK businesses is already on a par with that of the full 1990s recession.  Is this as bad as it gets or will it get worse?  UK Economy News seemed to suggest that there may be worse times ahead:

“While the headline retail price index indicates that inflation is around about the 2% level there are two other inflationary indexes used to calculate the cost of living and these are hovering around about the 0% level.  It is inevitable that both of these relatively unknown measurements will fall into negative territory next month and there are serious concerns that the retail price index could soon move below 0%.”

The economic downturn occurred because years of lax lending inflated a huge debt bubble, and after poor investments and fruitless repackaging, huge losses occurred - losses which the banks did not have the capital to cover.  A black hole was left in finances, consumerism was hit, and it was up to the government to do something about it – a rescue package for which we the taxpayer have been, and will ultimately, foot the bill.  This problem has been exacerbated by casino bankers’ intent on risking vast sums of money without much foresight; they played into the fact that the global economic world tends to favour by reward short-term strategies over long-term prudence.  This is very dangerous, particularly given that it is the comparably few ‘experts’ who are given carte blanche to manage the assets of millions, as the fate of the global economy is played out by huge risks by people with little personal accountability.

We cannot of course expect the greedy bankers to shoulder all of the blame.  Greed trickles down into lower level business circles where the customers are inundated with offers for loans they have no chance of paying back – and with the proclivities of many for ‘discounting the future’ there is irresponsibility at both ends; the banks for making it too easy to get oneself in debt, and the customer for acting irresponsibly with the offers they receive and their becoming susceptible to the materialist allure that is concomitant with a ‘buy now pay later’ ethos.

We are seeing with the present economic difficulties that because Britain's recent years of economic growth has been largely built on fragile credit and debt, it is very easily exposed in crises.  But one mustn’t forget that the same is true of our latest ideological problem - the problem of having everything too central.  This is the great paradox - centrality is essential for prudence - but if over-centrality is allowed to breathe it will starve the democratic oxygen on which our foundations currently rest.  I do not mean that it will disappear, but there will be a lot of disgruntled folk who will feel that the stratification between state and society is too wide for either one to touch the other.  The concerns have been heightened by the spectre of what might happen if a crossover occurs; that is, if the structural beliefs in the system crumble further, which seems likely as this has had a negative effect on British industry, and on the rise in unemployment. 

Moreover, the high rise in divorce, inequality, violent crime, teenage pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases, abortion, student debt, overall personal debt, the ridiculous grade inflation that has demeaned our education system in the name of equality, and the marginalisation of Christianity, have all contributed to this problem. 

Yet it is also true that supporting one’s own industrial assets in a much more globalised economy can be a double edged sword.  In the past, widespread unemployment and social deprivation were caused by an archaic economy that was being run by union barons, and our wealth was being squandered propping up industries which were choking the whole economy and limiting Britain's potential.  We are moving into an era - a new epoch - where a very different kind of deprivation is occurring - one which can be stopped before it picks up too much speed.

Perhaps the take-home lesson is that although we are in a recession, money isn’t really the root of the problem here; for if we try to make it the root of the problem we may adopt the kind of pathological obsession with its influence that the New Testament writers warned against.  Unlike Marx I do not view the economic as determining the social.  Societal problems are primarily inter-personal, moral, ethical, cultural, and social in origin.  If the proximal causes of these societal problems are inter-personal, the distal cause is the decline of traditional values and the decline of the family unit – both have I think been the biggest causes of a great many of Britain's problems in the last forty years, and the most significant factors which have been primarily behind the assault have been the diminishing of positive education and the feelings of contempt for it that so many people currently have. 

So what is the solution to this problem, and how can we help?  Well firstly, as with most problems, the first place one can start is with the self, then have an influence on those around us, and work hard towards spreading the influence further.  To have the effect of bringing things together, one must realise that each system, whether economic, moral, religious, or educational, relies upon the recognition of an independent and concrete method of success.  In simple terms, if we were attributing this to, say, the economy, we might say 'there is only one way to run a successful economy' and our chances of success would depend on our understanding of what that way actually is.  If it were a moral dilemma, the foundations for a successful analysis would rely on our agreeing that there is a standard by which we can judge things.  If it were a religious dilemma, we must admit that primary truths solve the problem every time, not cultural relativism.  Each time we are admitting to an independent and concrete method of success, or a method of establishing the truth in any given situation, and that serves as a good template for the whole of life.

We have seen in places that as the political regime goes, so goes the society.  We do not live in an era where we can say with any confidence that governments reflect societal values; instead most of the time it drives them. The average member of the British establishment has views that are way to the left of the average citizen.  These are the people that control how our children are educated, and that education (along with parental influence) greatly conditions what they will pass on to future generations.  If we are to be successful in helping people out of this, we must help them to a greater understanding of personal responsibility, but also we must help them to frame it in the wider setting of knowledge and education.

A better society requires good human solidarity and good governance - both of which will be achieved much quicker if there is to be a national understanding of this 'ideological convergence' - for only then will we find a successful coalescence between society and the state.  In writing this message I have not gone into great detail about what this 'ideological convergence' really consists of - but I have not really needed to.  Everyone can recognise it the moment they start to think about the 'best' way to achieve something - for the best way invariably involves following the clearest instinct - the instincts that are strong enough to dispense with all the weeds and leave only the cleanest soil; it is the cleanest soil that one likes to chose in order to begin new growth.  The soil that forms the substrate of national politics must have its weeds taken out in order that a fresh ideological crop can be grown.

As for the financial plan for times ahead; it is well known that it is not that difficult to bring about a recession by behaving as though you're scared of one happening.  Given that there are so many forces at work it will remain difficult to tell the extent to which the root cause of the credit crunch was hysteria or actual cause for trepidation.  And as the pre-election dust begins to settle we are, as expected, beginning to observe the precursory electioneering as party members attempt to seduce the electorate, scouring the ransacked economic and mercantile landscape looking for the remnants of political advantageous one-upmanship.  The ‘scavengers milieu’ is a dirty place if one seeks to use the global recession as a tool for attacking opposition policies without coming up with any alternatives.  This is similar to young earth creationism where adherents spend all their time trying to criticise evolution but never positing any positive theories as alternatives.

If ever there was any doubt about why God allowed us to live in a world with so much potential for danger and pain as well as all the good things, I think the economic system can act as a good model.  Just as God knew that if we were to have freedom to choose we must have the freedom to choose unwisely as well as wisely, and that if we are to have bodies that we are to keep safe we must require physical nerves that alert us to pain, so too we must be able to find parallels with the economy.  Free market capitalism provides a partial antidote to the socialist economic repression and stultification, and it opens the gate for free enterprise and personal innovation.  Yet also it ushers in opportunity for greed and cupidity and it has the correlative effect of engendering greater inequality by widening the gap between the rich and poor.  The welfare state has positive attributes – it caters for those in need, those who are genuinely incapacitated or out of work, those who are entitled to old-age pensions and those who require childcare benefits, but it also has the negative effect of allowing people to be dependent on welfare, and in some cases it impedes progressive social development.  If we are created into freedom then that very act of creation must occasion us to go wrong – and that must be equally true of the economy as well. 

Whichever party is successful they are going to have tough job restoring confidence and doing their bit to help fix the economy.  But we have a part to play too – our prudence and our togetherness is essential.  Perhaps the best thing that can come out of a recession is that pecuniary strains and hardships so often turn our heads in the direction of the many other things in life that are so much more important and precious and valuable than money, all of which, we will find, are branches connected to a qualitative root that bears the hallmarks of God.  If ever there was a good time to look - now is that time.