Why we’re fighting the cuts

Fighting the cuts…

We’re here because the cuts are yet more of the same: government making it easier for companies to screw us more by handing them the public sector, removing rights and support that protect us and forcing us into temporary low-paid jobs. These cuts are targeted at the most vulnerable, they’re going to make life a lot worse.

…but not defending the state nor its taxes

We’re not here because we thought life before the cuts was a bed of roses. Far from it. The state provides services that we rely on, like the NHS and schools, is the same state that takes us into wars, polices our every move, defends big corporations at all costs and, above all, looks after itself. When we are fired or sick and get welfare we’re treated like dole scum for collecting barely enough to live on when there’s no good jobs about. We want to question and change this whole system and not simply ask for higher taxes to “fund the deficit”. People with money should help others but we’re not calling for more taxes to bolster a system we can’t stand. Nor do we think that increased spending to “boost long-term economic growth” will benefit anyone but big business.

Fighting for a real alternative

We’re here because we know that if we don’t push back, we’ll be pushed over. But we’re not fighting for the past. We’re fighting for a future where we’re in control of our lives, where we’re able to look after each other without relying on the state. We’re here for a world based on cooperation not competition, a world that’s not somewhere off in the future but that we’re creating in the present. And that’s what we’re fighting for when we fight the cuts.


4 Responses to Why we’re fighting the cuts

  1. Carol Laidlaw says:

    Very interesting and I will pretty certainly visit. But I’ve heard this kind of rhetoric before and I’m getting impatient with people who know what they’re against but have no clue what they’re for and how they’re going to get there. Personally, I prefer to do some campaigning within the system where I know it will work, and because some structures are necessary to any kind of society and ought to be kept. The solution is to have a different set of people running them, not to abolish them, and to have a properly democratic structure in place, not an elected dictatorship that simply allows the members of a political elite to take turns being in power.
    If you want to dispense with the State, what do you propose to use instead to do its role in organising and distributing resources? Don’t say “the people”! Has anyone come up with a plan for a democratic, co-operative structure (or structures) that could fulfil the same functions well enough?
    This is what’s missing from all Left wing ideologies.

    • Jason Hawke says:

      I agree largely with Carol’s sentiments. Although, I would argue that the failure of the Left is largely due to a lack any leadership, as opposed to ideology. It is a failure of imagination. The ideological blue-print does contain ideas which most people would agree, but these have never been (in modern times) converted into a cogent and pragmatic strategy which people can visualise and associate themselves with. Even when certain groups within the Left claim to have done this, it is almost certainly followed by ugly and partizan in-fighting, bordering on the sadomasochistic. This is a serious problem as it undermines everything the Left does.

      Since you do not favour the alternative of increased levels of taxation, what is your proposal? An attempt to build a coalition of the Left through the unions? I find it hard to imagine the public having an appetite for this kind of action.

      Just a note on the use of language: in my experience, I have found that as soon as you start using phrases like “big business” “corporations” and “companies to screw us” whilst referring to the state, it tends to shut down interest from a lot of people -and very quickly. This is probably due to the fact that they are general terms used to describe extremely complicated and interlinked systems; this has the following effects: a) it looks like we don’t understand the system; b) we are incapable of describing it competently; c) the phrases are loaded with ideological (perceived or not) bias.

      I should say, after all that lame throat clearing, I happen to agree with your basic standpoints and I extend my solidarity to you. We do need to stand together to defeat this government, and at the very least, you are taking some positive action. If I’m ever in Leeds, I shall endeavour to make it down. Good luck with everything.

      • cutscafe says:

        Hi Jason, Sorry for the slow approval of your comment, it wasn’t censorship, just this happened in January and we’re not checking the website anymore!

  2. Jason Hawke says:

    Just realised the events are from a couple of months ago. I hope there is more planned. I live in Ripon which is about an hour from Leeds, so if you need any help give us an email.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s