Fear eats the soul ... but is jolly good for business.

[non sociopath skin]

ww.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jul/30/public-sector-jobs-oliver-letwin

A pretty straightforward insight into the "thinking" of Tory, Blairite
and Orange Booker alike.

To paraphrase a familiar epithet "If you want public servants to work harder, threaten them with the sack. If you want private financiers to do much the same thing as always, give them billions of taxpayers' money"

Seemples.

The Skin

[LeftishBrit]

1. Aaaarrggggghhhhh!!!!

This is particularly nasty when it's combined with the other attitude, common to the Right, that those who do not have a job are workshy, and should be punished by loss of benefits if not in more active ways. 'Nine out of ten people on invalidity benefit could do some sort of work.' Nine out of ten is probably a Tory exaggeration; but it's likely that many could indeed do some sort of work *if* they were given the right sort of work, and the right conditions, and were not threatened with the sack if they could not keep up with the able-bodied.

So the Tories (and their right-wing LD and New Labour hangers-on) are combining two attitudes that might possibly be defensible separately, but are utterly toxic together.

(1) Everyone should be expected to work; and people who don't work are generally failing to do their duty in society and should not expect benefits. (Possibly OK in a full-employment society geared at providing work opportunities for everyone.)

(2) Having a job is not a right, but a reward of merit; something that people need to earn and to constantly defend with their efforts, and indeed to constantly compete with others for. (Might not be so bad if there were adequate provisions for those who could not win these prizes.)

Together these attitudes add up basically to 'Do kick people when they are down! Punish people for being poor, weak, vulnerable, or for any reason unable to compete! Kick them out of their jobs, and then punish them for not having jobs!'

Ugh.

And of course, this generally does not apply to the rich and powerful. Even if a banker or high-ranking media executive does lose their job for outrageous mismanagement, they will be given a golden goodbye and a pension to cover them comfortably for the rest of their lives. They will never end up needing the dole, and then being kicked off it for being 'workshy'.

[LeftishBrit]

2. Not a new attitude, of course.

The very essence of Thatcherism. I remember people in the 80s and 90s arguing that people have to fear losing their jobs if they are insufficiently 'productive', in order to create a 'culture of excellence' instead of a 'culture of mediocrity'. I even heard such things from some people who were left-wing voters, but had imbibed the basically Thatcherite principles promoted within their own organizations.

Apart from the inhumanity of such attitudes, they are IMO counterproductive. What they tend to instil is precisely a 'culture of mediocrity'. People, unless they are either very rich or very reckless, tend to play safe under those circumstances. They do what's expected of them, insofar as they can, but don't take the risk of doing anything unusual that might go wrong, and are generally not very adaptable to new situations. This may work out OK if the job mainly involves certain forms of salesmanship, or turning out as many identical products as possible; though even there fear is likely to hamper initiative. But in any occupation that involves creativity or adaptability; in research and development; in teaching; in the caring professions and the social servies; in jobs that involve a lot of interaction with the public; in medicine at all its levels - fear may weed out the very bad, but it will *also* weed out or discourage real excellence!

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. smaller classes='less productivity' - but that's what everyone wanted

Measured by exam results, teachers' productivity has grown considerably over the past 20 years - but the right wing claim that those exam results aren't true. So teachers can't win, as long as the Tories are measuring their 'productivity'.

And health is another area where simple 'productivity' wasn't the outcome everyone wanted. If it had been, then you'd have slashed employment in the NHS, and just concentrated on the basic life-saving stuff. But everyone wants a decent quality of life for patients; and that costs more. But you have to accept that in 'productivity' measurements.

Basically, Letwin is just coming up with another way of saying "screw those who can't afford to go private". Productivity is just the excuse.

[LeftishBrit]

4. Excellent points

This all shows the Tories' suspicion and contempt for public services.

[T_i_B]

5. Looking at Letwin's track record....

....it becomes apparent that he's more motivated by contempt of others then any genuine desire to serve the common good.

[ikri]

6. Game Theory

It underlies a fuck of a lot of right-wing thinking, everyone operates in a world where fucking each other over for rewards is the norm. It's the world of psychopaths and financiers (not a mutually exclusive group). Competition is always the best motivator in their minds. Compete to get a job, compete for your pay and compete to retain your job.

The entire history of humanity might prove them otherwise, but they've never let reality interfere with their beliefs yet.