Cameron, can you clarify -- are we big or broken?
Election 2010: Guffwatch!
By Sophie Elmhirst Published 13 April 2010 13:39
Back to Dave for today's Guffwatch. The manifesto speech was all about us. They can't do it on their own, the poor politicians, they need our help, they haven't got all the answers (part of me wants to ask why -- can't you just get on with it? I'm quite busy). There was a pinch of Obama, too: "we the people". Always good to sprinkle Obama in your speech: shows originality.
And then there's society. Oh society, the ever-present, ever-morphing abstract concept that peppers Tory patter. Society was mentioned again. And again. And again and again and again.
Here's where I get lost. First, society is "broken". Then it's "big". Then, there "is such a thing as society, it's just not the same thing as the state". So is society big and broken? Shouldn't we mend it before we make it big? Or will it only be fixed once it's big?
And if society is broken, but not the same as the state, does that mean the state isn't broken? So why don't we stick with the state?
Besides, why do you want us -- society (are we society? I'm not sure any more) -- to do everything if we're so bust and malfunctioning? Apparently under the Tories there are going to be "community organisers" to build the "big society". I hope they know how to fix giant abstract things whose meaning changes all the time.
What else does Cameron say? Be your own boss, sack your MP, vote to change the whole system. But hold on, Westminster's broken, too. It's a "gravy train", our politics is corrupt. But "together" we've got to make our country better: "Join us in forming the next government of Britain," Cameron invites, banging his proverbial drum.
HANG ON A SECOND. If they're broken, and we're broken, how on earth is this ever going to work? We're both as bad as each other. It will be the blind leading the blind ever further down the broken alley. Society doesn't stand a chance!
Poor old society. I don't think it ever knew it was broken in the first place, and I'm not at all sure it wants to be big. I reckon it's sitting at home, grumpily blaming Thatcher for launching the obsession -- if she hadn't gone down the "no such thing as society" route, it might have been left to live the quiet life. Although it was rather rude of her to suggest it didn't exist at all.
The moral of the story? Leave society (aka us) alone, Dave. Please?
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Jobs
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists

















4 comments
I think you'll find it's the state that's way too big and broken, and I don't think it takes a genius to figure out what he means.
It is also bloated, banal and bankrupt (literally and morally)
I was pleased that none of the callers to Radio 5 live (that I heard) bought into this either.... are we really going to have to suffer another 10y of Thatcherism under the guise of yet another PR smoothie? and where was the environment and global warming?
If I join the government, do I get expenses?
Reading this article made my head spin!
But this policy sounds like they don't really know what to do, so they want the rest of us to do it for them. Which is just silly. As if they really would let "we the people" rule.
Post new comment