Moat, Facebook, And The Failure Of Political Discourse

There has been much written in the past week of Raoul Moat and that Facebook page. Generally, it's been much of a muchness with the consensus being total contempt for Moat, and disgust with those who saw it fit to join "RIP Raoul Moat - You Legend".

Of all the pieces I read holding this view, probably the best-written were this eloquent pair from Anna Raccoon.

My own thoughts were very much on a par with Anna's, at least to begin with, especially after reading some of the 'get in there, my son' type comments in support of what Moat had done, on the group's wall.

But by around Wednesday, I'd come round to understanding exactly why the group was set up, and why so many were happy to put their name to it.

Whoa! Drop those hackles and step away from the window's X button for a second. I didn't say they were right to do so, just that I understand their motive. OK?

I can see there is some explaining to be done here.

Fortunately for me, such a job was made easier last night as JD, in an excellent article at the 'blog of the oft-invited rancour' has almost articulated my thoughts to a tee.

People like me do not see the massive state machinery as representing protecting or serving us. That machinery can be embodied by the police, or the tax man, or the quangocracy or the NHS or the schools or pretty much anything that bears the symbol of Leviathan.

I have grown to detest and hate with every sinew of my soul the very authority which I was once, years back, proud to support in a Burkeian conservative sense.

Authority now is distant and aloof. As Orwell and other libertarians came to understand, the state when it grows serves only itself, and citizens get in the way of their agendas and motives.

Indeed.

In these paragraphs, JD has described exactly why entire communities have lost respect for instruments and departments of the legislature. The only difference between his view and mine - if I understand him correctly - is that JD focusses most of his ire on the actions of the police, whereas I see the blame lying further up the command chain than that.

Like JD, I find myself partially agreeing - probably for the first time ever - with George Galloway!

The former Respect MP, George Galloway, said he believed the tribute page reflected the beliefs of a section of society.

He said: "I think it is a cry from the heart from poor, white, working class, unemployed people who are drifting on to dangerous shores.

"They hate the government, they hate the police, they hate society and feel left behind."

Could be truth in that. And, as I've written before, the feeling of being 'left behind'; of being marginalised and ignored, is not altogether unintentional.

The main parties have an incredibly forensic approach to elections. On count nights, they will corral their supporters to intensively scrutinise the ballot papers to see which ballot boxes, in which areas, are most likely to gain them support. Districts which show a willingness to vote, especially for their candidate, will be targeted first in the next election - areas where people 'don't do politics' are a waste of time to canvass.

Similarly, areas which offer a rich seam will attract market researchers to pinpoint what are the most pressing issues in their lives. The information will then be fed to the relevant central office, spreadsheets and databases updated, and policy formed accordingly.

It doesn't bode well for those who don't understand the process, those for whom politicians may as well be talking in a different language, those who haven't a clue what the word fiscal means, and those who can't really be arsed.

They all have valid concerns, and will talk about them at length to one another, but politicians won't give a stuff. It's not in their self-interest to do so.

As I never tire of mentioning, I grew up with working class people, I employ working class people, and I mainly socialise with working class people. The overwhelming feeling amongst them is that politicians are not interested in their meagre concerns. Nor will they ever be, as Nick Clegg recently illustrated with perfect clarity.

I'd venture to suggest that Boaty & D's initial motivation to blog may have had something to do with this ivory tower attitude from our politicians - I know it was for me. Likewise, Old Holborn's impressive visitor figures are testament to the fact that millions of us feel that however loud one shouts, however hard one tries to point out that swathes of respectable middle and working class people are being blithely ignored ... Politicians. Just. Don't. Care.

It's frustrating enough that - even in the face of informed and well-articulated debate - government is happy to ignore widely held opinions in favour of their quangoes and selected righteous arse-lickers. However, it's even more exasperating for those who have no realistic outlet to express their concerns, and no skill in conveying such even if they tried.

Owing to the electoral machinery described above, many of those who admired Moat have probably not seen a politician in the flesh for years. Even at election time they'll receive little by way of literature, and their complaints will mostly be ignored if they are in an area of no electoral importance for the main parties.

They are fundamentally dissatisfied with how they are treated by the state, and their main interaction with the state is through the police. So when Moat leads the police on a merry old dance, he is 'sticking it to the Man' and, in their minds, is to be applauded.

It's true that many of the working classes bring a lot of this misery on themselves by not voting, but their worries and concerns should still be addressed. Bullying and coercion to fit into a proper way of living as perceived by those who do vote only serves to further erode their trust in the system as a whole, makes their participation in the process less likely, and further escalates the anger and sense of isolation.

It's why many of the lowest of the working classes I have met are able to start an argument in an empty room. Issues which would appear inconsequential to most are magnified to a position of huge importance - for many, personal relationships are the only part of their lives over which they feel they have some kind of input. A perfect example is the fact that Samantha Stobbart's sister is apparently not allowed to visit her in hospital, at the behest of her Mother with whom she "has had a difficult relationship". Under the circumstances, can you imagine the same attitude in any other class of life? I know I can't. Whatever the feud, such a hideous attack would see family drawn together, not stubbornly adhering to some argument over who done what at Christmas three years ago.

It's the consequence of decades of being ignored; of being dictated to by those who they feel impotent in engaging with; of being bossed around by the state with no avenue of objection.

Rather than take the Facebook group as a sign of degenerative behaviour, maybe all parties should be looking at why, for very large sections of the public, a social networking site is now a more realistic method of registering dissent than by trying to talk to a politician.