‘These are the Times We Live In’

These days I spend much of my time reading international newspapers and magazines and, as I sit indoors trying to escape the pollution of my home city,  I have to say that my mind is more troubled now than at any time in my, perhaps, too-long life.

I read These are the Times We Live In (Imtiaz Dharker) ……  and she added to my ponderings at a time when we are technically equipped to move around the globe with unprecedented ease:  although some of us, in person and in terms of our thoughts, ideas and beliefs, are prevented from so doing by regulations inspired by increasing intolerance, or ‘differences’ (perceived or otherwise).

The English expression ‘May you live in interesting times’ is often presented as a Chinese curse, though its origin is uncertain.  Or, to put it another way, “How did we come to this?” – as Don Corleone is said to have quipped in, both, film and opera.

Given the times in which we are now living, it is surely appropriate to ask several concurrent questions: How did we get here? What is driving us? How is that being done?  By whom? Why?  Where are we going?  And last, but of the greatest importance: Where will it end?’  

I wonder if Tim Berners Lee had any concept of where his brilliance and charity might have taken, and still be taking, the human race; and how Larry Page and Sergey Brin and/or Bill Gates and Paul Allen now regard the direction the baton which they were handed is now following?

As someone who grew up under the influence of a ‘world war‘ (WW2), which was fought in the defence of liberty and freedom of movement and belief, I ask: “What is driving recent moves ‘to the right’ in politics in many countries?”

I am increasingly aware that I, and the generation after me, grew up in what became the  ‘Great Moderation’, that postwar period when stability for the people felt within reach.  But, in the background, and in some ways, the period benefited from comparison with attitudes towards each other that were clearly governed by context :  first, WW1, then the ‘Roaring Twenties’, followed by the Great Depression of 1929, followed in turn by what became the Second World War; these were certainly periods that helped set minds across the generations.

Families – grandparents and parents, aunts, uncles, and even teachers – were probably influenced by WWI and WW2 in much the same way – and by the aftermaths.  For me, it was noticeable even then on many an occasion that if I complained about almost anything, the response would be: ‘Stop whinging, you do not know how lucky you are …’

But when the Great Moderation came to an end, it was not a nice passing. In America, lauded as ‘the land of the free’ and ‘the last, best, hope of Democracy’ (an illusion in many ways, in retrospect): came Vietnam, JFK (not ‘just’ the assassination), Watergate,  ‘9/11’ where 15 (of the 19) ‘terrorists on board were Saudi nationals’, and Afghanistan, Iran (going back to Mosadeq), Iraq?

Even in the UK,  ‘unsavoury’ political incidents, including Suez, Rhodesia, Profumo, Thorpe,  Stonehouse, ‘Back to Basics’ and ‘Mandy’ and so much more, caused us to slowly come to believe that ’the System’ was ‘flawed’.  Likewise, and perhaps as a consequence, we began to lose confidence in our democracies.  Or as Winston commented, as far back as 1947, “Democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”.

Thus, by these means came the gradual dawning of the realisation that much of what we had been taught to trust in, and to share, was but an illusion. Perhaps?

It became increasingly clear that we had cause to doubt that the ‘right’ outcome was a natural result of the elective process. We came to realise that it did not automatically put the ‘right’ people in the ‘right’ place or position. Rather, the methods by which they were elected and the structures and behaviour of the governments they formed, and subsequently administered, were in so many ways truly and deeply flawed.

Perhaps in retrospect, that was the true ‘beginning of the end’: when a decade-long expansion in the US housing market activity peaked in 2006 and residential construction began declining.  The term ‘Wide Boy’  when I was a lad, meant a person who is dishonest/ or who deceives people in the way he does business. It was, in general, used to describe individuals whose ‘honesty, integrity and practices’ were thought ‘dodgy’  (dishonest: a dodgy deal) – or they got involved with a ‘dodgy’ businessman and lost all their savings. All of which we might keep in mind was current to the Great Recession, in the event that my Reader continues reading below.

It was stated by some that “The rise of the new far-right is not an unexpected phenomenon:   economic, social, and political affairs culminated to act as different factors, beginning in 2007, with the Great Recession. These factors can be grouped and analysed as the ‘triggers’ of one of the greatest insurgencies of far-right politics since the end of the Cold War.  In 2007, losses on mortgage-related financial assets began to cause strains in global financial markets, and in December 2007, the US economy entered a recession.

“That year, several large financial firms experienced financial distress, and many financial markets experienced significant turbulence. In response, the US Federal Reserve provided liquidity and support through a range of programs motivated by a desire to improve the functioning of financial markets and institutions, and thereby limit the harm to the US economy  ”  (But many continue to think it was mainly benefitting the markets and institutions.)

But ‘the best was yet to come’: at the end of 2008, the economic contraction became deep enough and protracted enough to acquire the label “the Great Recession.”

True that the US economy ‘bottomed out’ in the middle of 2009, but the recovery in the years that followed was thought by many to have been unusually slow. Certainly, the US Federal Reserve offered unprecedented monetary accommodations in response to the severity, but some think the real damage had already been done.

It was also so severe, as Virgil hinted, sometimes “the remedy is worse than the disease“. Meaning that what we saw, at least some still think, was another of ‘those’ situations where a proposed solution causes more harm – or negative consequences – than the original problem it’s meant to fix! This concept is found in classical literature, such as Virgil’s Aeneid.

Thus, that financial crisis led to a range of major reforms in banking and financial regulation, congressional legislation that significantly affected the US Federal Reserve – and, thereby,  the global economy.

Consequently, the Great Recession had a significant effect on political opinions, leading to increased distrust in establishments. And, thus, a rise in populist movements, and a shift in voter-behaviour, such as supporting ‘anti-Establishment’ parties and ‘punishing’ incumbent parties.  It also contributed to the Erosion of Trust in government and economic institutions, especially in regions hit hardest by austerity measures. Some research indicates it can also lead to a long-term shift in party allegiance for those who came of age during the recession.

Facts, dear Boy, facts!!

…. in pursuit of which, one has to ‘step back’ sometimes and bow to ‘greater’ minds. Manuel Castells, Professor of Sociology, wrote much on the topic of shaping peoples’ opinions. Studying the public’s increased distrust, Kenworthy and Owens stated:

“By examining public opinion data since the early 1970s, we can speak to three competing accounts of how attitudes might change:

We address these hypotheses, with a special focus on the Great Recession, by examining data from the General Social Survey (GSS) and from the Pew Research Center’s “Political Values and Core Attitudes” surveys. These are nationally representative surveys of American adults. The GSS has been conducted annually or biannually since 1972, most recently in 2010. The Pew surveys have been conducted at irregular intervals since 1980. In response to economic ‘downturns’, one possibility is that the impact of economic conditions on ‘public opinion’ is largely symmetric across phases of the business cycle. ‘Downturns’ have an impact – but the changes they produce are off-set by shifts in the opposite direction : growth periods. Thus, ‘recessions’ have no ‘long-term effect’ on public attitudes.

A second possibility is that recessions have a scarring impact that persists – but only on people in their formative years of life, perhaps in their late teens or early twenties? The attitudes created by a recession might well endure for such a group by producing significant views about business, finance, government, opportunity, inequality, and fairness.

Yet, has it changed the Public’s preferences on the appropriate role of Government in regulating the economy and helping the less fortunate? Has it shifted political orientations or party allegiances? The purpose of this recession brief is to examine whether such opinions have changed during the ‘Great Recession’ and prior recessions, as much as it’s often assumed differences in opinions across cohorts. But, in the absence of large differences in cohort, size or a steady increase in the frequency or magnitude of economic downturns, this scarring effect will yield no noteworthy shift for the population as a whole.

A third possibility is that the impact of recession periods and growth periods is asymmetric. The effect of declining economic fortunes on public opinion is stronger or longer-lasting than the effect of economic growth. This was true of the Great Depression. Even if change generated by recessions is not as strong as change during depressions, if recession-induced changes ratchet up over time, they can cumulate into significant shifts.”

Each of these three possibilities, along with my own experience post WW2, might be taken as suggesting that economic, social and political experiences – especially in the context of conflict – in the late teens, might linger to influence one’s own attitude and reactions throughout the remainder of one’s life, even if conditions and context change radically. Put simply, if one grew up with poverty, it might be harder later to shift one’s attitude towards more favourable economic,  political or ‘security’ conditions.

Thus, when I posit the question, “Has the Great Recession altered America?” Well, as my Granny would quote the philosophers (who probably copied it from her!): ‘When in doubt, turn to education’.

I asked: What role does education, or lack thereof, play in far-right politics?  “Education is not inherently liberal or equal – it is political. Far-right parties across Europe are seeking to reshape education to reflect their illiberal, nationalist and authoritarian values, capitalising on discontent with the current provision. Offering alternatives is important both politically and to defend the democratic and equalising function of education.”

But, that’s for another day!

Time now for bed, and as young Will had Hamlet tell us, “’o sleep, perchance to dream’.  Wow, I hope not with all this on my mind …. tomorrow, Insha’Allah!