Merry Christmas 2014

"He who is unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a god".                      from 'Politics' by Aristotle

Society v Individualistic that appears to me to be the current debate in democracy and concerns Jurisprudence and Politics equally.  Justice v Compromise is the debate in jurisprudence as set out in this blog and Public v Private is the debate for Politics. [See the article ADR the Achillies Heel of a Democracy and the table "McDade's Paradox" on this blog].

What appears to be happening is the active engagement in the watering down of societal standards by individualism, that is to say privatisation, alternative, contemporary ideologies impacting on the public domain moreso than the private domain.

We can now see this via this blog that having mediation/Alternative Dispute Resultion (ADR) / Informal Dispute Settlement (IDS) - all the same thing: in the public domain such as the Judiciary and Legal Profession; Whitehall; NHS; BBC, Police and Local Authorities then standards are lowered by gagging confidentiality clauses.  The Midstaffs debacle appears to be as savage as it got, but did it?

Since the late 1990's and possibly earlier we have seen four pillars of SOCIETY fall or been knocked over - ADR in the Judicial system; spin, spin, spin in the Press; an Unjust War in Iraq concerning Defence and then the 'belly up' of the Banking system.  These four categories did not happen by accident, but rather by design.  Further design is the mass youth unemployment in Europe and the appearance of Food Banks.  All taken together suggest or imply that SOCIETY is being eroded by the watering down of standards by the ideologies of privatisation, alternative and the contemporary rather than any misplaced focus on the traditional.

English law is traditionally premised on "honouring our obligations via contract law", but what has happened is that MODERN or NEW (Labour), ie privatisation, alternative and contemporary have impacted on the Common law of England by inserting ADR clauses in contracts effectively ensuring that if a contract is in breach, there will be a compromise and a new contract will be given effect.

As English law is the basis of American law, Russian, law, Israeli law, Australian law, etc etc so the "effect" is global lowering of standards: the supposition being that we are headed for a global war, ie World War Three - if we don't REALISE what we are doing to SOCIETY by focusing on the individual.

So politically, David Cameron entered office with the ticket "BIG SOCIETY", now is the time to spell out what he means by this political ideology, as the 2008 Recession and need for AUSTERITY measures is only going to effect further privatisation, alternative and contemporary ideologies if we continue to erode standards in our public domain institutions.  At least now any further privatisation, alternative or contemporary "CHANGES" or "REFORMS" to SOCIETY can be seen for what they are rather than being done covertly under Austerity Measures.  (Perhaps we should learn our recent lesson from Europe, that we will be penalised by the European Union if we are too successful in dealing with the deficit.  So take stock, think, do we really need to erase the deficit so fast by austerity measures only to pay a very large sum to the European Union, rather than going more slowly to see what actually "needs" to be done, over when it can be done over time.  Obviously, their must be some grand scheme to the plan's design, but is it all really necessary to curb the public state or to compromise it and lower standards as a consequence.  Can we put the brakes on, can we even engage brain?  Is there a timing issue, and can we go slower - so as to avoid penalties from the European Union?  Or do they already have an end game timetable and are praying that there is not a revolt mid-to end of term.  For example, in the public sector people are paying a minimum of 25% tax, so that means that every fourth worker is effectively free; so do we need to see the "value added" in the system.  (That is to say, for every four private sector workers paying 25% tax, there is one free public sector worker: for every four free public sector workers who are value added, there is one additional bonus worker - the ratio is 4:1 private:public ensuring that the private sector is always bigger than the public sector.  The 'Big Society' was meant to be the Third Sector - people are volunteering via the welfare reforms but there is no "benefit" to their doing so and some may even be volunteer trapped while adding value to the state under which they are seen as a "burden".  How in the grand scheme of things is the Big Society panning out under the coalition?  There is a reason for the public sector in a democracy, which should be affordable on a ratio 4:1 or 16:4:1.  Historically, the UK democracy is something to aspire to, but we appear to be on a sticky wicket to a thrashing. Back to the politics and jurisprudential issues ...)

  

I would ask the Prime Minister David Cameron (Conservatives), Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg (Libdems) and the First Minister for Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon (SNP) to give serious consideration to a REGULATION to impact in the whole of the European Union, and to work with other countries such as America and Russia to at least, as a minimum requirement, to outlaw by removal, ADR from the "public" domain - especially the judiciary and legal profession - where it does the OPPOSITE, it is by its very essence and nature a PRIVATE DOMAIN ideology and therefore should not exist in a PUBLIC domain concept which requires universal application as it creates a two tier society and IS NOT JUSTICE, but COMPROMISE.  The Judiciary and Legal Profession should be solely about the APPLICATION OF THE RULE OF LAW - not its non-application or non-law.  The Application of the Rule of Law creates a SAFE AND JUST SOCIETY.

The problem is therefore not a beast [devil] or a god as per the quote from Aristotle above - it can be tamed but not to do so, could spell disaster for Society as well as the individual.