Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts

Friday, 31 December 2010

Capital, Workers & Democracy

"We’re All In It Together…"

How often have we heard this phrase, presented as a statement of fact by political leaders? It seems to have become the ‘must have’ phrase, to be repeated ad nauseam every time some new round of ‘austerity’ is to be inflicted on the majority of citizens. Certainly it’s the phrase of the moment for the likes David Cameron and George Osbourne.


But are we?

We all know how badly most people have been affected – and are about to be affected – by the largest global financial ‘crash’ since the Great Depression following 1929. Unemployment, falling wages, reduced benefits and welfare across the board – with much more on the way.

But what about the rich? How are they doing, and what are their prospects? Don’t know about you but I’ve found that any facts and figures for this minority, who hold the vast majority of society’s wealth, seem to be so far under the Politics and Media radar as to be deeply subterranean.

However, Daniel Raventos of US Political Newsletter ‘Counterpunch’ has come to the rescue. He cites a report by Merrill Lynch, a bank owned by Bank of America, whose target clients are the 9 million or so persons, worldwide, who are either rich (HNWI – High Net Worth Individuals with assets of $1M+) or super rich (‘Ultra’ HNWI - assets of $30M +) [‘Assets’ here exclude primary residence, ‘consumer durables’ or ‘collectibles’]. So, that would include, oh, David Cameron, certainly Tony Blair with his reported £20m ‘consultancy’ for JP Morgan (bank), most, if not all, political leaders and a great many politicians anywhere in Europe or the US. Probably a lot of the senior TV media ‘journalists’ and presenters too.

So how are they all doing in our ‘we’re all in it together’ financial crisis?

Yep, you guessed it! Not badly at all. Aside from a sharp, temporary, dip when global shares fell at the onset of the crisis in 2008, their aggregate wealth is back pretty close to where it was before the crash – back up to $39 Trillion by 2009. Sure, they lost a couple of years of ‘growth’, but not to worry, things are looking good. Merrill Lynch are confident in their projections for the next 3 or 4 years that they can help them along to an average 5% year on year growth in ‘net worth’. That’s ‘net worth’ of course after, you know, life’s mundane essential consumables and consumer durables have been deducted – restaurant bills, a few designer rags to knock about in, the his‘n’hers Ferraris, toilet paper, that kind of thing.


So maybe we’re not all in it together then? If you’re wondering why, read on…

Surely it's time we looked at the fundamental driving forces deep underneath all the propaganda and BS? Simply put, there are two utterly opposing interests at work. On the one hand, Owners of Capital, who primarily live off renting (or investing) money or other assets and the Workers whose primary income is derived solely from their Labour.

Yes, it really is that basic. The fewer Workers can be paid for their Labour, the more wealth the Capital Owners gain and vice versa.

But here's the rub with Democracy. Intrinsically the Workers are in the majority – always. So a democratic system that actually represents their interests is fundamentally at odds with the interests of Capital Owners whose main desire is to own ever-increasing, limitless Capital. Which is without a shadow of a doubt where the evidence leads. How many Owners of Capital have we heard say that they have 'enough'? Virtually none. Over the last few decades the wealth of the rich has risen dramatically whilst the wealth of Workers has stagnated or decreased, with real costs in health and peoples' lives, to say nothing of unrealised potential. And the divide is increasing.


Of course, both sides need each other. Entrepreneurial drive is very often a good thing and works to the benefit of all. Crucially, such worth to all is the very thing that ultimately guarantees the consent of Workers for Owners of Capital to operate and even be highly rewarded. But if the system of democracy worked properly, the welfare of the majority would place limits on the accumulation of wealth. It clearly doesn't. The 'banking' system has been shown to be a casino, run by Owners of Capital, where they retain the profits but vast losses must be paid off by Workers nearly exclusively.

Most of us recognise the need for both 'sides'. This is entirely consistent with what, in a single phrase, might best describe the route for all of us to our maximum fulfilment and happiness – “...to each according to their needs, from each according to their abilities...”

Furthermore, most us know what psychological and sociological studies have confirmed. ‘Needs’ are different from 'wants'. Needs make us happy, wants really don't. And the freedom and opportunity to pursue our abilities is also vitally important.

Some of us need to live life on a ‘bigger stage’, some don't, and all can be equally rewarding. What we need is society that reflects this truth whilst ensuring equality of opportunity.


So a balance must be struck between Capital Owners and Workers. In a democracy, this is the job of Politics and equally importantly those who should enable us to be accurately and fully informed, primarily the Print and TV Media, but also Science and Academic research. It should be obvious that these institutions need to be as independent as possible from both competing primary driving forces. But by our own foolish consent, corruption, both legal and illegal is endemic in Politics and Media and, partially so, but increasingly, in Academia.

Demonstrably, Capital Owners have become so wealthy and powerful that both Politics and Media are effectively owned by them. Greed is something that can and does infect us all and it is certainly at the core of the most powerful Capital Owners we have today. The speed with which humanity is degrading the very planet and ecology that gives us life is the absolute evidence of this. The best, untainted and overwhelming evidence we have from Science is that the wipe-out of 95% of all species, including our own, is a serious possibility that may become irreversible within less than a few decades; a result of climate change. And that is far from the only resource or pollution catastrophe that awaits us imminently.

The only way out of the impending demise is for the key institutions of democracy to be removed from the hands of the Owners of Capital. By definition, those representing the majority (Workers) cannot also be members of the minority (Owners) club. This does NOT need to be, nor should be, state, beaurocratic control or ownership of everything, but simply a system where 'rules' – rule of law – applies fairly to all. We are told no such system can exist. Don't believe it. A system that removes corruption by State, Private or other 'concentrated' interests is perfectly possible. It is absurd to believe otherwise of a species that has developed such immensely more complex systems in science and technology. We simply need to devise appropriate employment rules and terms in the same way we have for other 'special' categories of employment, such as police or military.


Remember, none of the basic welfare provisions that have been won (and are now being rapidly eroded) have ever been voluntarily 'gifted' by the Owners of Capital (now owners of Politics and Media) – nor can we expect them to be. Since the Owners now own Politics and Media virtually entirely, any attempt to work within the present system is no more than rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic. The system must change.

To the younger generation of Workers (or the unemployed or underemployed): good luck – you'll need it. Sad as it is to have seen the mere fledgling attempts at democracy so badly undermined, your lives, either way, will be nothing like mine.

Words: Mike Hall
Images: Tabz O'Brien-Butcher

Monday, 31 May 2010

The British People, Part II

[Andy Rees follows his pre-election musings - found here on page 15 - with this post-election analysis]

So here we are. The sky hasn't fallen on our heads. Maggie hasn't come down from the clouds on a black chariot pulled by seven snarling horses. But still, it's Torygeddon, right?

Perhaps. But the big thing is – who really knows? No-one!

There's been an awful lot of very strong reaction to the Tory-Lib Dem blood pact, but personally I can’t see what all the fuss is about. Now I'm no Tory, but I'm no Labour or Lib Dem either.

The thing is we can't actually expect politicians to live up to the promises that they make during election campaigns. And I don't think it’s entirely their fault either. As far as I can see, it's all a big colourful game. It's a circus, and the politicians are the trained animals in the middle, getting all the applause and all the anger when it doesn't go right. The crowd bays or it cheers, depending on whether they like what they see or not.

Can you blame the animals for performing? Hardly. In the same way you can hardly blame the politicians for wild lies and emotive promises such as 'free cancer drugs', because that's what the people want.

Or is it what the people want? There's someone, something else we haven't mentioned yet.

It's not just the people and the politicians, just like it's not just the lions and the audience. The ringmaster... They mitigate everything. They are the conduit between one and the other. Ladies and Gentlemen, I give youuuuuu.... The Media.

Such is the vastness of this country; such is the concentration on political might in Westminster, that we very rarely have any first-hand contact with big party politics, or big party politicians. So how do we find out? The media. Newspapers, TV interviews, the radio, Bloggy McBloggerson and his friends.

And guess what? They've all got an angle, an opinion, a take on it. There's not a single news show or newspaper, not a single piece of text written on, about, around or after the election (including this one) that doesn't take a perspective. And taking a perspective means, inevitably, that something gets exaggerated, and something gets lost.

And this is a two-way process. We learn about the politicians, and the politicians learn about us. And just as we think of them as a bunch of slimeballs, they must look at the people like they're from another planet. Who are these angry men and women? Why do they shout at us all the time? They can have all the focus groups in the world, but it's from the media where the impression really comes.

The media needs a good story. A good story is, often, perhaps always, a short and snappy story. Quick news. Gossip, opinion, slander, promises. And if there's ever a pause to consider the bigger issues – justice, wealth redistribution, national identity – it's always done by getting some experts to disagree with each other so that they all look stupid. It's all conflict. And if it's not conflict, it's quick news.

Even so-called respected journalistic programmes like Today on Radio 4 seem unable to do anything but ask vicious questions in the hope of getting a headline. You might say that it's right to challenge those who hold power, and bring them to account. Of course. But when that challenge becomes a few acerbic questions where the answers are then ridiculed or disbelieved – a hunt for the quick hit story – what use is that?

We pick each word that politicians say to pieces. Look at the linguistic glass-treading around 'cuts'. Some said 'deep', some said 'savage', some said 'severe'. Politicians were chastised for saying too much, or not saying enough. Is it any surprise that they never tell the truth? If they told us the truth about the amount of money that would have to be cut from the Budget to avoid us becoming a Hellenic mess, no-one would've voted, or we'd all have voted BNP.

So, two things. First, the truth is shit and hard to bear. Second, the Media pounces on any mistakes, and we clap and eat some more popcorn as they rip open the proverbial jugular. I'll say it again: is it any surprise that they never tell us the truth?

To come back to my starting point – what's the big fuss? I bet that nothing much will change, or at least it won't be vastly different to a more ‘left-wing’ coalition. Sure, there is a chance that the Tory-Lib Dem coalition will 'cut' by launching a moral crusade against the poor and vulnerable. But that would've happened under a Labour Government too. No-one likes a scrounger.

I think we all need to take a step back. I think we all need to stop believing that this country is simply the sum of its Cabinet and Prime Ministerial parts. The Government, although it and the media would have you believe otherwise, is one tiny cherry on top of a massive civil service and civic society that is far more static and far more resistant to top-down change than the Twittering social commentators would have us believe. I hear it so often – 'we're the internet generation, it's a new age.' No. You just spend too much time on Facebook and reading G2. Get outside, smell the piss and the honey, the beauty and the beast, and you'll get a much better idea of what the hell is going on.

Words: Andy Rees

Thursday, 4 February 2010

These New Puritans / Deaf Institute / Wednesday 03/02/10

These New Puritans shambled onstage at around twenty to ten, picked up their instruments and lumbered through a (roughly) hour long set, comprised mostly of songs taken from their excellent new album Hidden.

To say this gig was in any way enjoyable would be a stretch - the sound was uniformly dire, with Hidden's deep, pounding beats giving off ugly, crackly distorts where they should have been whole and punishing, and basslines which should have been subtle rendered in an ear-vibrating tone that could only ever be mildly annoying.

Add to this the seemingly under-rehearsed nature of the band, and some truly awful onstage instrumentation (imagine those lovely wind interludes on Hidden replaced by standard electric synth piano sound, then distort it), and you're beginning to understand the level of my disappointment with last night's performance.

The sound, that was just unfortunate, but the musical mistakes were glaringly obvious, particularly in 'Drum Courts - Where Corals Lie' during which the band lost their way completely, almost stuttering to a grimacing halt at a moment when the beautiful chorus melody should have soared.

The gig's saving grace was the percussion which, although at times distorted, was well executed, particularly during the intro to 'We Want War'.

The problem, it would seem, with the These New Puritans live experience, is the fact that they are missing a vital fifth member - the studio.

The support act were called worriedaboutsatan (thanks to Jon for pointing this out). This was pretty standard stuff, a duo seemingly in thrall to Autechre and Burial performing mildly enjoyable background music with no defining characteristics. Not bad at all, but not very good either.


Words: James Roome

Tuesday, 24 November 2009

Work for Now Then Manchester

We are looking for two people to join our advertising team:

Head of Advertising

A new Manchester-based, monthly magazine is looking for a lively, enthusiastic and driven individual to head our advertising sales team. Applicants must be willing to work to strict deadlines and possess a strong interest in independent traders, local arts, entertainment and culture. You would organise targets, co-ordinate a small sales team and report to the Project Manager.

Previous experience in advertising sales is desirable but not essential. The position entails planning of monthly sales and marketing strategy, updating the sales database regularly, developing relationships with clients, amending sales pitches depending on the target, collating artwork and maintaining accounts. It also requires the ability to operate basic Microsoft Office programmes (eg. Excel), and some design skills would be preferable. This position is ideal for recent graduates seeking work in advertising, and would be paid on a pro rata basis.

The ideal candidate would be flexible and able to work 25-30 hours per week during busy sales weeks for the primary deadline, before switching focus to chasing artwork for the final deadline towards the end of the month whilst preparing for the following month.

If interested contact nowthenmanchester@gmail.com with your CV and a short statement detailing why you think you would be ideal for the job.

Advertising Assistant

A new Manchester-based, monthly magazine is looking for a lively, enthusiastic and driven individual to work as part of our advertising sales team. Applicants must be willing to work to strict deadlines and possess a strong interest in independent traders, local arts, entertainment and culture.

Previous experience in advertising sales is desirable but not essential. The position entails regular communication with the Head of Advertising, working towards sales targets, developing relationships with clients, amending sales pitches depending on the target and following a monthly sales and marketing strategy. This position is ideal for recent graduates seeking work or work experience in advertising, and would be paid on a pro rata basis.

Hours of work would be weighted towards the first two weeks of the month, with 20-25 hours required to achieve sales targets before the deadline.

If interested contact nowthenmanchester@gmail.com with your CV and a short statement saying why you think you would be ideal for the job.