The free market is the only kind way - time to change the political lexicon
Whoever becomes the next leader of the Conservative Party, to retain power at the next general election they must re-establish the Party's position as champions of the individual and the free market, writes Tim Lord QC.
Regardless of which candidate wins the Conservative leadership contest, the party needs urgently to address both its raison d'etre and its modus operandi. With Labour comfortably ahead in the polls, the new leader must take firm and fast steps to reassert to the British public exactly what the party stands for, and why, if it is to stand any chance of retaining power at the next general election.
One of the principal foundations for such rejuvenation must be an explanation of why the free market (i.e. Conservative) approach to organising society is in fact, contrary to so much of the vox pop, the kindliest way. Far from being the "nasty" party, the Conservatives are the "nice" party.
The only way to create a peaceful, prosperous and kindly society is through the "rule of law". At its heart, this involves profound respect for the rights of the person and of his property. The sanctity of the individual allows for self-determination, development, ambition, creativity and dynamism in life.
On the other hand, the left wing, statist, command model subordinates the individual to the interests of the State. Unfortunately, the State is not some kindly abstraction. It is a collection of powerful and privileged individuals who have gained the levers of power over the rest of the people. As Orwell puts it in Animal Farm, "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others." There is nothing noble, virtuous or kind about such a model. People are not well equipped to observe the altruistic, self-denying ordinance that is essential to the kindly wielding of power. As Hayak brilliantly explains in The Road to Serfdom (written in 1944), little can result from socialist ideology except oppression and tyranny. He ends thus: "The guiding principle, that a policy of freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy, remains as true today as it was in the nineteenth century."
The unkind society which socialism inflicts arises through a number of impulses. The incentives for risk-taking, invention, thrift, ambition, advancement, self-reliance, independence are all squashed. This inefficient and stultifying environment means that the resources available to the society, including to look after those in need, are dissipated. Socialism actually makes its citizens impoverished whilst professing to help them. As dissatisfaction and discontentment grow, so central command exerts ever more coercion in order to keep control of the people. The old Soviet Union, the PRC and Venezuela ought to make for chastening study for those left-wing cheerleaders in the West.
Further unkindness arises due to the inherent enviousness that underpins much Socialist sentiment. Resentment and jealousy of the success and acquisitions of others ("the rich") are dressed up as concern for those less well off. Thus an impetus to attack and pull down masquerades as a crusade for the benighted. It matters not that such destruction diminishes the overall output thus depleting the resources to help those in need since, of course, dependency rather than self-reliance is the life blood of the Left. The last thing that left wing parties really want is for their supporters to become better off and able to look after themselves; after all, where would their votes then come from? There is, therefore, an inherent need for the Left to find ever more classes of alleged victim so as to set them against the rest of society. Hence an obsession with division and discord is hard wired into the left wing approach, fermenting disharmony and unhappiness.
The free market on the other hand is the very opposite. It allows the individual to decide their own destiny. The energy and dynamism of people acting freely in their own interests yields the material prosperity and scientific advances which create the wherewithal to look after those who need help. The much maligned "market" is only the place in which the wishes and decisions of individuals come together. People are happier if they are enabled and equipped, one might even say empowered, to fend for themselves.
We have become reliant on the easy popularity of giving things to people as if they are free and either never need be paid for or, if so, only by others. So an announcement of a £30 billion package of measures to help certain causes is always heralded as a generous and thus kind policy. However, no mention is generally made of the true cost. Public borrowing is in substance the taking of benefits now by a generation that has no intention of paying for them, instead leaving its children and grandchildren to pick up the tab. Taxation is always thought to be something that will fall on others i.e. "the rich", whereas there are too few of them and they are too mobile to constitute a sufficient source or target. A kinder approach would be to tell the truth about the costs rather than create an unsustainable public spending spree, which will inevitably implode amidst chaos and misery, requiring a harsh return to reality.
Sir Keith Joseph described the "ratchet effect" of Socialism, in which Conservative administrations just hold the line before the next Labour government (nowadays, seemingly even "Conservative" ones) pushes on with ever more expansion of the state. Once the State starts to do something or give something to someone, the idea of reversing that alleged beneficence is met with howls of outrage. So the State gets bigger and bigger, its clients expand, its providers increase in number and the whole thing ratchets every onwards. The suggestion of balancing the books is termed "austerity" and so, what might be thought to be the moral imperative of a society living within its means and not burdening future generations, is turned upside down and described as some great wickedness.
Left-wing adherents seem to be regularly on manoeuvres, looking for ways to spread and implement their agenda. They tend to be more fanatical in between elections than their right-wing opponents. The latter, who prize individual freedom, are more likely to be getting on and exploiting their liberties in non-political ways. To the statist and collectivist Left, the prosecution of their cause seems to take on a life of its own and marching, demonstrating and other agitation are all part of the mission. Social media, of course, creates an ever-present platform for the zealous propagation of views and the governing classes are too prone to let such noisy minority clamour dictate their approach.
The parties of the Right and of the free market need to undergo some spiritual rejuvenation in which they rediscover their moral purpose and are able to explain that theirs is the kinder and more progressive way. They need politicians who understand the more high-minded principles behind the policies and are prepared to take the fight to their opponents when debating the rights and wrongs of particular decisions and events. Boldness and a sense of crusading are required.
The fight needs to be taken to the powerful opponents in the media, the Church and the teaching establishment. There is no justification for the political bias evinced on news bulletins, from the pulpit and in the lecture theatre. If those in positions of authority, in whom the public repose trust on the basis of respect for their fairness and impartiality, choose to abuse such position and betray such trust by their political partisanship, then this needs to be exposed and criticised at every turn.
The Right need to make proper use of the positive nature of the free market. It should be embarrassing for a young person to crave a society in which everyone is at the mercy of the state, fall to be told how to live their lives and then coerced into conformity. This should be the very opposite of "cool". The positive and kindly effect of harnessing an individual's "animal spirits" so that not just the individual, but society as a whole, enjoy the benefits of self-reliance, achievement and autonomy must be stressed.
Finally, and most importantly, the Conservatives need a political renaissance in which their policies in every sphere of government are analysed and tested against the moral principles of the free market. In this way, right wing policies should become instruments of doing good so as to create a kinder society.
Let the moral crusading commence.
