Thursday, 9 April 2009

“Broken Britain” ( Part 1 )


Well it's been some time since I've sat down and wrote anything for this Blog, no particular reason really, just had a great deal on my mind recently, as we socialists do most of the time. Its never easy being a freethinker, and that's not a person who believes God created the universe and then abandoned it, rather anything but and nothing of the sort in my case. It's over thirty years now since I first became interested and involved in the possibility's for a better world,and they very much do still exist as they did when I first began to realize that another world was and is yes possible. If only, and this is a big if, if only others were able to see through the mist and cloud that obscures vision - only if.
I've been living for this if, most of my life, the battle of ideas it's become and the battle it truly is, propagating the socialist alternative to a world population shackled as it seems to the anvil block on which metals are shaped by the hammer of the blacksmith. Isn't it true when you think about it, children educated,trained,prepared and schooled to meet the needs of society, not their own life's fulfillment or a right just to be content and expect happiness in whatever form it takes. The curriculum and course of study uses religion and conformity to shape the minds of our young in preparation to only meet the needs of a system of society based on satisfying profit making.

I read to day that Chris Grayling called today for a "war" on anti-social behavior, saying that it was time to "reclaim our streets" from gangs of youths.

The Shadow Home Secretary said that the “grotesque” attack on two boys aged nine and 11 by two young brothers in Doncaster was a wake-up call for “Broken Britain”.

So here we go again, a main stream politician describing Britain as Broken, in this case a Tory playing to an audience who he hopes to find political favour with, for an attack that is not only horrendous as it is unimaginable, carried out by children upon children; indeed this says that something is very seriously wrong with the world we live in, and I would suggest has been for some considerable time. Being not fully aware of all the facts regarding this case as I'm unable to bring myself to read in full the tabloid tattle. It never the less still raises questions that seem to have gone unanswered for long enough. I found it hard to get my head around the murder of James Bulger (16 March 1990 - 12 February 1993) His killers were two 10-year-old boys, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson (both born in August 1982)

James disappeared from the New Strand Shopping Center, where he had been with his mother Denise, on 12 February 1993 and his mutilated body was found on a railway line at Bootle on 14 February. Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, then 10, were charged with James's murder and subsequently found guilty and imprisoned for a time.

I remember way back then,spending time with a friend trying to work out how two children were capable of carrying out the murder of another child, we never found answers that made any commonsense, other than this had to be a reflection of what our society had begun to become, 'turbulently damaged' a violent downturn for the worst. That downturn continues amongst the young, and 16 years on from the death of James Bulger, who if he'd been alive today, would have been 19 and standing on the threshold of adulthood.

In London much is reported about young people and violence today, particularly knife crime, the number of young people killed in the capital this year already stands at 5 that's just over one a month, last year 28 teenagers were killed, 22 of whom were stabbed.I could go into more detail but you probably are already all to familiar and well informed with what you read and hear in the news, if not daily almost weekly it seems. Why is it that newspapers and politicians always reach for the labels to stick on the young, how often are they labeled 'yobs and hooligans' lambasted and castigated and then the next thing you hear is "I blame the parents" and so on.

Over the last twenty years or so a great many things have changed in our society like the disablement and disappearance of many industries that required skilled manual labour and traditional trades such as bricklayers, carpenters, mechanics and so on, they have ether totally vanished in some case's or new methods are applied that are reliant on less skill or labour input in both production and maintenance. One good example of this is public transport, the buses we use in our Towns and City's are almost everywhere conductor free. London was the last preserve of the bus conductor in Britain, and, for all I know, the world. I suspect that Blackpool trams may still have conductors. So with the driver ( driver conductor ) performing both roles, saving the bus operators the costs of one other person; and it yet remains to be seen if this can even be improved upon after all the London Docklands Railway has run trains without drivers for years now. The point being that the labour required for and in the production of products and services is less than ever it was, why employ a glazier when a window as a whole unit, can be produced in the factory without the use on a building site, of even the carpenter in the process. No question about it, new production applications certainly do improve some aspects of the finish article as well as saving time and money; but for whom, that's the six million dollar question?

Workers never have a say ultimately in the chosen process of production, hired and fired when and if required, has always been the way no mater what particular skill they may have trained for and obtained.

Apprenticeships have been a feature of education and training system for many hundreds of years. The apprenticeship tradition grew, in Britain and in much of Europe, from the medieval guild system, and transferred to the new manufacturing industries of the industrial revolution. Although they had been statutorily regulated under Elizabeth 1st, apprenticeships were left largely to employers and trade unions from the beginning of the 19th century until the mid-20th.

In the 1960s a system of statutory Industrial Training Boards (ITBs) was established in many industries. Under this system firms offering apprenticeships attracted grants funded through a levy on all firms in the sector. At this time, too, formal requirements for ‘off-the-job’ training, involving attendance at further education colleges, became prevalent in many sectors. However, apart from qualifications in these colleges, the principal indicator as to when a person had completed an apprenticeship was whether they had served sufficient time in the trade. ‘Time serving’ could involve seven years in some cases.

With the rapid decline of the traditional heavy industries in the 1970s the number of apprenticeships reduced dramatically. In parallel with the decline of apprenticeships, and partly caused by it, the late 1970s and early 1980s saw a marked rise in youth unemployment.

No comments:

The Socialist Way

Blog Archive