Wednesday, 30 January 2013

In our time?

Once upon a time a great,  but now failing nation, thought it would shake things up in a democratic election but inadvertantly ended up creating a one party state where all the supposed main parties were in fact branches of the same party in terms of their policies, intent and craving for outright control above all else. In their lust for power and high position individuals would seek to turn their leader's unspoken wishes into reality no matter how vaguely and ineptly these unspoken wishes were hinted at. For his part the leader was happy to utter - in his public speeches - vacuous, meaningless and inane declarations which sounded impressive until you actually listened to what was said; this was basically nothing. This clever ploy meant the Government minister's were continuously vieing and competing with each other to establish their policies as the definitive statement of their leader's thoughts. This did not always work as the leader often changed his mind without telling his ministers. The result was a chaotic government always at odds with itself, constantly struggling to hide its disharmony behind a curtain of what it liked to call 'assertive actions' and public propaganda announcements in the state controlled media which they believed parroted what the 'man in the street' was saying or would, at least, engage with their prejudices on the basis of wealth and ethnicity.

One such program which was held up as a prime example of 'assertive action' was a stepping up of the 'Workshy' program which had first been set in place by government statute five years before. This allowed organisations friendly to the Government to take over 'under performing' government departments such as Welfare and Pensions and put in place their own provisions to deal with the 'workshy'. This included using secret police to spy or obtain denouncements on their targets, agents who did not have to meet the police requirement for evidence or statements. These agents were able to harrass innocent people in an attempt to gain a 'confession' and could threaten them with loosing their homes, starvation and even going to jail for 'fraud'. The Government propaganda with regards to the 'Workshy' was highly successful. So when sick and disabled people who were also included in the 'Workshy' program and then deemed 'fit for work' by these secret police assessors started dieing or committing suicide the general public's view appeared to be, "So what! They had it coming, the lying, thieving, bastards!" while keeping their heads down so as not to attract the secret police's attention to their own increasingly miserable lives and dodgy financial transactions. Many multinationals operating in the country supported the 'Workshy' program as it offered them forced cheap labour, subsidised by Government and a further tax free break.

In the mean time the Government worked hard to weaken the powers and morale of the country's established police force and the military so it could mold them to its own will and perverse ambitions while infiltrating friendly organisations into both to improve efficiency  and ensure they could gain full control when ever they wished. There was much talk of the need to reduce military numbers to pay for the new vengance weapons they were promising would return the country to its former glory.

The real problem the Government was facing was imminent bankruptcy of the country courtesy of the neo-liberal voodoo economics of borrowing against pre-existing debt which was merely building up an unsustainable debt and would inevitably bring the country to its knees as its ability to purchase raw and finished materials was reduced. The leader was warned about the dangers of the economic model, by a number of economic experts but was persuaded by his lackeys and financial friends that his vision for his country's renewal was the best and only vision. To deflect attention from this looming disaster for his country he declared war against the rest of Europe. .......

So is this Hitler's or Cameron's Government  I am describing? 

The parrallels, to my mind, are very close.

No comments:

Post a Comment