Welfare, workfare, warfare

The concept of the nobility of labour is often attributed to the nineteenth century Scottish essayist, historian and philosopher, Thomas Carlyle. Has Rishi Sunak been reading him?

In his book, Past and Present, first published in 1843, Carlyle wrote: "Labour is Life: from the inmost heart of the Worker rises his God-given Force, the sacred celestial Life-essence breathed into him by Almighty God; from his inmost heart awakens him to all nobleness, - to all knowledge, 'self-knowledge' and much else, so soon as Work fitly begins."

Those opening words, Labour is Life, strike a chill into our hearts today, evoking memories of the notorious motto Arbeit macht frei (work liberates) emblazoned over the gates of the Nazi concentration camp at Auschwitz. That phrase itself is based on the title of a German novel of 1873 Die Wahrheit macht frei (the truth liberates) by Lorenz Diefenbach.

Carlyle was hugely influenced by German thought and the admiration was mutual, with Goethe calling Carlyle "a moral force of great importance". But Carlyle was also strongly influenced by his Presbyterian upbringing and admired his parents, both of whom were deeply pious. In the opinion of his father, James, "man was created to work, not to speculate, or feel, or dream." Thomas may have departed from his father's maxim in regard to the latter elements but he certainly emulated his Protestant work ethic.

That, today, makes him a controversial figure and, although his reputation is now somewhat rehabilitated, for many years he was dismissed outright as a fascist. Whether Rishi Sunak has read Carlyle and is as influenced by him as his predecessor, Margaret Thatcher, was by that other great Scottish writer on labour theory and political economy, Adam Smith, I know not.  But his recently expounded "moral mission” to end “sick note culture” and get fit people back to work makes one wonder.

There is much talk from Tory MPs about adopting a 'carrot and stick' approach in regard to addressing the issues of longterm sickness and worklessness in the UK. This is a phrase I loathe as much as I do those who use it. The unemployed are not donkeys - and, besides, one would be prosecuted for using a stick on a donkey nowadays, and quite rightly. But those on benefits, it seems, are fair game for, and long overdue, a bit of stick. And Sunak, he would have us believe, is the Prime Minister ready to put it about.

This sort of macho posturing is ludicrous and speaks of the utter desperation of the man as he faces the inevitability of ignomnious defeat in the polls, starting with tomorrow's council and mayoral elections, and open revolt amongst his own backbenchers. But, however pathetic his attitudinising, it will be having a chilling effect on those on benefits, just as his Rwanda bill is having on asylum seekers now crossing in numbers from the UK into Ireland.

I do not believe, and never have, in the inherent nobility or dignity of labour; in most cases it is a dreary necessity foisted on us by capitalism to keep us under the yoke. Now, in a post-industrial era, with mechanisation, computerisation and the rapid emergence of AI, surely this is the perfect moment to revisit our outdated notions of work, not try to prop up the collapsing old model?

Nor do I agree with James Carlyle's assertion that "man was created to work". If he truly believed that, good Presbyterian Burgher that he was, he must have misread his Bible. Genesis teaches that it was only after the 'Fall' that the hard work began, as a punishment for disobedience and sin. But is it naive to think that humankind could ever return to its supposed prelapsarian state of bliss? The coincidence of climate change with advanced technology surely make this the ideal, indeed the critical, moment to try to regain paradise. 

Of course labour will still be required, including the manual variety, but it could be organised on a very different model to the capitalist one, with technology removing much, if not all, of the drudgery. The emphasis then should not be on 'getting and spending' but on personal development and self-fulfilment. Utopian idealism? Possibly, but the alternative is too grim to contemplate.

There will be precious little dignity in the future Sunak envisages.

Popular posts from this blog

On old age

"The fact is that when I come to think it over, I find that there are four reasons for old age being thought unhappy: First, that it withdraws us from active employments; second, that it enfeebles the body; third, that it deprives us of nearly all physical pleasures; fourth, that it is the next step to death."  Writing his essay,  De Senectute (On Old Age), in 44 BCE, Marcus Tullius Cicero went on to refute these four supposed reasons in characteristically robust and forthright manner. Cicero wasn't one to sit about moping in his own old age; he remained actively engaged in the political life of the Republic whose survival, in the face of tyranny, he championed so fiercely.  Cicero was nine years younger than I am now when he met his untimely end yet he considered himself already an old man; or, rather, his society judged him to be so. His second point about age enfeebling is more germane. Physical decline had not yet impacted him but, six years on from my retirement, I
Read more

Born to rule

When, ten days ago, I posted my piece about the manipulated image of Catherine, Princess of Wales, and her children (see Snap Judgment) I didn't know of her cancer treatment. Had I known, I would have adopted a gentler, though I hope no less critical, tone. But I didn't know, and nor did any of us outside the immediate royal circle, which rather goes to strengthen the case against the monarchy. For Kate and her family the diagnosis of cancer (as yet unspecified) will have been a devastating blow, as will the chemotherapy she is currently undergoing. On a human level, of course I sympathise and extend my best wishes for a full recovery as, indeed, I did at the time of her father-in-law's diagnosis. It is particularly cruel, then, that on top of all this she has been obliged to record a video statement to reassure the public. As if she didn't have enough to contend with already. But such is the unpalatable obligation placed upon any royal personage - noblesse oblige. Whic
Read more

Working to rule

An avowed republican I may be but news of King Charles III's cancer diagnosis is nevertheless a cause of sadness - I might not want him, or anyone else, as my king but I wish the man no harm.  However, Jonathan Swift's opinion that "health is the greatest of all possessions; a pale cobbler is better than a sick king" serves as a timely reminder that ill-health in the monarch is not simply a personal matter, it has constitutional implications. To be blunt about it, Charles' death, in constitutional terms at least, would be no great problem; the king is dead, long live the king. The succession is assured and the crown would pass immediately to the Prince of Wales, who would be pronounced William V. The ship of state would sail on. A long-term or debilitating illness, on the other hand, could have far-reaching consequences for the institution of the monarchy at a sensitive time, coming so soon after the death of Britain's longest-reigning monarch, Charles' mo
Read more