With only months to go till the next election, all the major parties have been setting out their vision and ideas for the country. Late last year David Cameron delivered the Hugo Young lecture attempting to row back from his vitriolic anti-governmental conference speech and lay out his prospectus for Britain. But his speech was highly worrying as it demonstrated his flawed understanding of socioeconomic problems, and lacked any coherent analysis.

In any case the speech was titled ‘The Big Society’ and argued that Labour had created an overbearing and interfering state that had weakened personal and social responsibility. He claimed the atomisation of society was attributable to this ‘leviathan’ state and that we were losing the fight against inequality and poverty.

Cameron is correct in highlighting the nature by which society has fragmented and atomised itself into more and more avenues of individuality. However, by attributing this to the Labour government, he has completely failed to appreciate the principal economic and market forces that have done so much to damage our social fabric in the past decades. Unsurprisingly, there was not even a mention of this in his speech.

The Thatcherite post-industrial economy was driven by deregulation and free markets. Financial capital penetrated the economy and radically altered our established social and economic relations. Wealth creation and capital accumulation became the chief principles of our new economic order. The rampant choice and competition this generated transformed society. We became a nation of consumers, an ambition to earn and own formed our new culture.

In the Hobbesian sense, we became obsessed with satisfying our desires and passions. This new market allowed for such a society of individuals. With our appetite to advance and possess forevermore, wealth and money gave new meanings to social life. Coupled with the inherent inequalities of laissez-faire market economics, society was transformed into an atomised and individualistic reality, where our civic and collective senses had given way to our self-centred instincts. This economic hegemony has been the main culprit in degradating our social existence. The fact that Cameron fails to acknowledge this in his speech demonstrates either his total lack of socioeconomic understanding or his covertly disguised and genuine political instincts. I suspect it’s the latter.

It is almost incredulous for Cameron to argue that the expanded and stronger state created by Labour has destroyed our social spirit. The state has helped to temper the excesses of the market economy and provided a vital lifeline of support to those who lost in the scramble for ever-higher levels of wealth and accumulated personal assets.

However, by no means is it faultless. Labour has yet to reignite our collective spirit. Ideas like solidarity, fraternity, generosity, and compassion – values that historically underpinned British society and indeed the Labour party- have still not been genuinely re-discovered and brought back to their true meaning and purpose.

We need a new social model for Britain. Not one based on a simple expansion of opportunities and a lazy attitude towards civicness, as Cameron has proposed. But one rooted in our communitarian tradition, which recognises that to advance individual freedom we must strengthen the social bonds that make autonomous living possible. To create a nation of powerful people, we must deliver greater equalities in capabilities. But it cannot be achieved through the individually-focused prism that Cameron envisages.

Vouchers and pupil premiums, ending the so-called couple penalty, selling patient records to the private sector, and privatising the delivery of international aid and assistance, are all individually-inspired solutions that reinforce the atomistic nature of society he passionately criticises. Even taken with his ambition to evoke a new culture of responsibility through an army of social entrepreneurs and activists, it will not be enough.

To create that stronger and fairer communitarian society will require an agenda of active civic republicanism. This cannot happen by chance, and will not be sustainable through a retrenchment of the state. A ‘partnership’ between the state and society working in tandem can only successfully deliver this powerful republican prospectus that embodies the ‘collective’ spirit. A holistic approach has to govern our thinking.

George Monbiot, has written about how society has become obsessed with consumption, and quoted Aldous Huxley’s greed induced totalitarian vision as an appropriate analogy. Monbiot poses the question of how we achieve happiness and wellbeing rather than growth. Addressing such challenges will help shift the emphasis more towards social and civic politics. We need a Britain that believes in collective capability transformation, where no one is left behind, and where acting together, we are stronger individually. This progressive vision must be Labour’s calling, not Cameron’s.

With only months to go till the next election, all the major parties have been setting out their vision and ideas for the country. Late last year David Cameron delivered the Hugo Young lecture attempting to row back from his vitriolic anti-governmental conference speech and lay out his prospectus for Britain. But his speech was highly worrying as it demonstrated his flawed understanding of socioeconomic problems, and lacked any coherent analysis.

In any case the speech was titled ‘The Big Society’ and argued that Labour had created an overbearing and interfering state that had weakened personal and social responsibility. He claimed the atomisation of society was attributable to this ‘leviathan’ state and that we were losing the fight against inequality and poverty.

Cameron is correct in highlighting the nature by which society has fragmented and atomised itself into more and more avenues of individuality. However, by attributing this to the Labour government, he has completely failed to appreciate the principal economic and market forces that have done so much to damage our social fabric in the past decades. Unsurprisingly, there was not even a mention of this in his speech.

The Thatcherite post-industrial economy was driven by deregulation and free markets. Financial capital penetrated the economy and radically altered our established social and economic relations. Wealth creation and capital accumulation became the chief principles of our new economic order. The rampant choice and competition this generated transformed society. We became a nation of consumers, an ambition to earn and own formed our new culture.

In the Hobbesian sense, we became obsessed with satisfying our desires and passions. This new market allowed for such a society of individuals. With our appetite to advance and possess forevermore, wealth and money gave new meanings to social life. Coupled with the inherent inequalities of laissez-faire market economics, society was transformed into an atomised and individualistic reality, where our civic and collective senses had given way to our self-centred instincts. This economic hegemony has been the main culprit in degradating our social existence. The fact that Cameron fails to acknowledge this in his speech demonstrates either his total lack of socioeconomic understanding or his covertly disguised and genuine political instincts. I suspect it’s the latter.

It is almost incredulous for Cameron to argue that the expanded and stronger state created by Labour has destroyed our social spirit. The state has helped to temper the excesses of the market economy and provided a vital lifeline of support to those who lost in the scramble for ever-higher levels of wealth and accumulated personal assets.

However, by no means is it faultless. Labour has yet to reignite our collective spirit. Ideas like solidarity, fraternity, generosity, and compassion – values that historically underpinned British society and indeed the Labour party- have still not been genuinely re-discovered and brought back to their true meaning and purpose.

We need a new social model for Britain. Not one based on a simple expansion of opportunities and a lazy attitude towards civicness, as Cameron has proposed. But one rooted in our communitarian tradition, which recognises that to advance individual freedom we must strengthen the social bonds that make autonomous living possible. To create a nation of powerful people, we must deliver greater equalities in capabilities. But it cannot be achieved through the individually-focused prism that Cameron envisages.

Vouchers and pupil premiums, ending the so-called couple penalty, selling patient records to the private sector, and privatising the delivery of international aid and assistance, are all individually-inspired solutions that reinforce the atomistic nature of society he passionately criticises. Even taken with his ambition to evoke a new culture of responsibility through an army of social entrepreneurs and activists, it will not be enough.

To create that stronger and fairer communitarian society will require an agenda of active civic republicanism. This cannot happen by chance, and will not be sustainable through a retrenchment of the state. A ‘partnership’ between the state and society working in tandem can only successfully deliver this powerful republican prospectus that embodies the ‘collective’ spirit. A holistic approach has to govern our thinking.

George Monbiot, has written about how society has become obsessed with consumption, and quoted Aldous Huxley’s greed induced totalitarian vision as an appropriate analogy. Monbiot poses the question of how we achieve happiness and wellbeing rather than growth. Addressing such challenges will help shift the emphasis more towards social and civic politics. We need a Britain that believes in collective capability transformation, where no one is left behind, and where acting together, we are stronger individually. This progressive vision must be Labour’s calling, not Cameron’s.

With only months to go till the next election, all the major parties have been setting out their vision and ideas for the country. Late last year David Cameron delivered the Hugo Young lecture attempting to row back from his vitriolic anti-governmental conference speech and lay out his prospectus for Britain. But his speech was highly worrying as it demonstrated his flawed understanding of socioeconomic problems, and lacked any coherent analysis.

In any case the speech was titled ‘The Big Society’ and argued that Labour had created an overbearing and interfering state that had weakened personal and social responsibility. He claimed the atomisation of society was attributable to this ‘leviathan’ state and that we were losing the fight against inequality and poverty.

Cameron is correct in highlighting the nature by which society has fragmented and atomised itself into more and more avenues of individuality. However, by attributing this to the Labour government, he has completely failed to appreciate the principal economic and market forces that have done so much to damage our social fabric in the past decades. Unsurprisingly, there was not even a mention of this in his speech.

The Thatcherite post-industrial economy was driven by deregulation and free markets. Financial capital penetrated the economy and radically altered our established social and economic relations. Wealth creation and capital accumulation became the chief principles of our new economic order. The rampant choice and competition this generated transformed society. We became a nation of consumers, an ambition to earn and own formed our new culture.

In the Hobbesian sense, we became obsessed with satisfying our desires and passions. This new market allowed for such a society of individuals. With our appetite to advance and possess forevermore, wealth and money gave new meanings to social life. Coupled with the inherent inequalities of laissez-faire market economics, society was transformed into an atomised and individualistic reality, where our civic and collective senses had given way to our self-centred instincts. This economic hegemony has been the main culprit in degradating our social existence. The fact that Cameron fails to acknowledge this in his speech demonstrates either his total lack of socioeconomic understanding or his covertly disguised and genuine political instincts. I suspect it’s the latter.

It is almost incredulous for Cameron to argue that the expanded and stronger state created by Labour has destroyed our social spirit. The state has helped to temper the excesses of the market economy and provided a vital lifeline of support to those who lost in the scramble for ever-higher levels of wealth and accumulated personal assets.

However, by no means is it faultless. Labour has yet to reignite our collective spirit. Ideas like solidarity, fraternity, generosity, and compassion – values that historically underpinned British society and indeed the Labour party- have still not been genuinely re-discovered and brought back to their true meaning and purpose.

We need a new social model for Britain. Not one based on a simple expansion of opportunities and a lazy attitude towards civicness, as Cameron has proposed. But one rooted in our communitarian tradition, which recognises that to advance individual freedom we must strengthen the social bonds that make autonomous living possible. To create a nation of powerful people, we must deliver greater equalities in capabilities. But it cannot be achieved through the individually-focused prism that Cameron envisages.

Vouchers and pupil premiums, ending the so-called couple penalty, selling patient records to the private sector, and privatising the delivery of international aid and assistance, are all individually-inspired solutions that reinforce the atomistic nature of society he passionately criticises. Even taken with his ambition to evoke a new culture of responsibility through an army of social entrepreneurs and activists, it will not be enough.

To create that stronger and fairer communitarian society will require an agenda of active civic republicanism. This cannot happen by chance, and will not be sustainable through a retrenchment of the state. A ‘partnership’ between the state and society working in tandem can only successfully deliver this powerful republican prospectus that embodies the ‘collective’ spirit. A holistic approach has to govern our thinking.

George Monbiot, has written about how society has become obsessed with consumption, and quoted Aldous Huxley’s greed induced totalitarian vision as an appropriate analogy. Monbiot poses the question of how we achieve happiness and wellbeing rather than growth. Addressing such challenges will help shift the emphasis more towards social and civic politics. We need a Britain that believes in collective capability transformation, where no one is left behind, and where acting together, we are stronger individually. This progressive vision must be Labour’s calling, not Cameron’s.