A black, bloody insurrection of the hard-working, over-taxed and unbenefited

13 November 2012

If you want to understand the mood of modern Britain, James Hawes’s novels of middle class fury are not a bad place to start. Hawes’s heroes are middle-aged men, whose dreams have collapsed. They want the nice, “normal” middle-class homes and secure jobs their parents received as a matter of course. But Britain is not offering them normal anymore. Normal is a foreign country to which they can never return. They are harried and broke. They work in dead end teaching jobs, as Hawes once did. Their homes are in rundown streets, where they must pay vast amounts of money to live in a pokey dump.

The moral of Hawes’s stories is that the puritan virtues of hard work and thrift offer no chance of escape. You have to do something extraordinary to have ordinary comforts. So his heroes turn to crime in A White Merc with Fins or become contestants in a reality TV show in Speak for England, Hawes’s best comedy, which Andrew Davies is filming. Hawes’s plots are absurd, but they speak for England too: for the frustrated, put upon and contemptuous England, which is exploding around us.

In My Little Armalite, the hero tries to become a celebrity in liberal London: a concerned talking head, whose career is made because the BBC and the Guardian make if for him. He finds an abandoned IRA gun in his back garden and persuades his accomplice to pose as an Islamist terrorist. After the accomplice stages a fake assassination attempt at a televised public meeting, the hero turns to the cameras and says what liberals want him to say – that he forgives, that Islamism is all the West’s fault etc. The house in north London, the Guardian column and BBC2 series are his for the taking.

When he first picks up the gun, however, his first thoughts are as about as illiberal as possible. He imagines all the enemies of the middle class, from benefit scroungers to bankers, and thinks:

‘You know what this country needs? A real bourgeois armed uprising at last!  A black, bloody insurrection of the hard-working, over-taxed and unbenefited. A dictatorship of the normal suckers. Merciless with revolutionary discipline against all who utilise tax shelters or vandalise bus shelters. Down with dealers, in drugs or securities. Let fairness prevail on pain of summary execution. Welcome to the Day of Judgement, roll up and get your low-number party cards, all ye who never lied to social security or sat down with a tax barrister, and let our battle-cry be: righteousness!’

Claim your gift

Hawes wrote this just before Lehman Brothers went down, but he might have written it yesterday. A righteous revolution is striking at all who want public money. Bankers, benefit claimants, immigrants, BBC executives, tax-dodging corporations, MPs… Anyone on the take is for it, even though the grounds for popular fury are often dubious to say the least.

George Entwistle received a redundancy payment of a year’s salary. This is the standard compensation package in secure, professional jobs. But then as Hawes understood, most people are not in secure jobs. They receive the miserable statutory redundancy terms. They cannot understand why license fee payers must reward Entwistle for failure. Nor, come to that, have they ever met someone who earns £450,000 a year.

Far from whooping it up at public expense, meanwhile, one third of the City workers who enjoyed the boom have lost their jobs. Conservative writers warn with justice that high finance is going the way of North Sea oil, and we may never see its generous tax revenues again. I don’t think the public will listen. The City showed how disconnected it was from the country, when it carried on paying bonuses after the crash. If it had had intelligent leaders in charge, rather than money-grubbing fools, they would have told their employees that there could be no bonuses for a few years; that they could not take taxpayers’ money and expect to carry on as if nothing had happened. Instead, the bankers chose greed over political caution, and turned the nation against them.

As for benefit claimants, the cuts the government imposes on them are equally stupid. The state cannot force the unemployed into work when there is no work to be had. As for immigrants, most want to work not scrounge. As for MPs, their £65,000 salary sounds a lot. But MPs must have a home in their constituencies – God help any who do not – and a London home too. Sixty five thousand pounds is not such a grand sum in those circumstances. Hence they played the system. Of course they did.

Is the British revolt counter-productive, then? I’m not sure about that. However messy and occasionally brutal Britain’s clean out of the institutions is, we have to do it, and keep going. (The law will be next, I predict.) But it is certainly hypocritical. MPs, journalists, bankers all have the right to complain that their critics would have done what they did if they were in their position. They can protest that Britain is punishing many for honest errors; that their accusers fiddle their taxes, pay with cash rather than cheques, and complain with unblushing piety when the state threatens their tax credits or child benefits.

But what did they expect? What country did they think they were living in? This is Perfidious Albion, and if you do not understand that the English can turn on you with a hypocritical ferocity, you should never have pocketed their money in the first place.

Give the perfect gift this Christmas. Buy a subscription for a friend for just £75 and you’ll receive a free gift too. Buy now.

Show comments
  • rndtechnologies786

    Good thought and nice blog.

  • Steve

    “…But MPs must have a home in their constituencies – God help any who do
    not – and a London home too. Sixty five thousand pounds is not such a
    grand sum in those circumstances. Hence they played the system..”

    Total rubbish Nick. As you well know, MP’s second home allowances are ON TOP OF the £65K salary and include apparently perfectly legitimate claims for running costs including, bizarrely the purchase os furniture, wide screen TV’s, duck houses etc. Incredibly these bastards also claim for food, correct me if I’m wrong but one doesn’t require extra food for working in London so how can this possibly be a justified expense?

    Try living in London for under £30K a year and trying to provide your family with a decent home. And then try to imagine how those of us that have forsaken privacy (having lodgers), nice holidays, decent cars etc. & cycled to work for 10 years to save money so that we can afford a reasonable home feel about the mental Westminster threat of mansion taxes and rises in stamp duty with absolutely no acknowledgement of the disproportionate way that this affects those of us that have to live in the capitol.

  • Niamhmunro

    Thank you for recommending My Little Armalite. I downloaded it onto my kindle and I’ve just finished it. Most enjoyable and funny.

  • Eddie

    Interesting – I shall seek out those novels; but my heart always sinks when Andrew Davies in involved in adapting a book for the screen: he always goes too heavily on the sex seems and clunking, hammered-home liberalism (so-called) – I have just watched the new-ish version of A Room with a View which he man aged to spoil with a stupid unnecessary ending and a sex scene that just would NOT have happene din 1912! His femae characters are always headstrong. ballsy, arrogant, selfish, ‘strong’ women – and his penchant for that is what has got HIM a great many commissions at the BBC, oh so ironically! But at least in modern-day Britain, such things will fit well.
    For me, the biggest scam in the UK is the way successive governments and the bank of England conspired – and stil are conspiring – to keep house prices high and rising. Most have mortgages, so most feel rich when that happens and consumer spending goes up. House prices should be allowed to fall to half of what they are now, and there should be high interest rates – ie not artifically kept low by the B of E. There should be rent controls, high taxes on 2nd homes, high taxes on buy to letters, and the market should be allowed to collapse – that would be fair. But fairness is not what happens, is it?
    Then there is the scam of unregulated mass immigration.
    Then the scam of giving rich people with hundreds of thousands or millions in assets maternity ‘pay’ and child benefit: the first costs us 4 or 6 billion per year, just so rich families with high earning and assets can get even richer: all benefits like that should be means tested – and would be if the country we run fairly, But it isn’t. So everyone is a selfish and greedy and fuck-everyone-else-ish as everyone else.

  • Hexhamgeezer

    Just like the film ‘Falling Down’ gives a middle class Guardianista, Potemkin Village of white revolt, so does this.

    Feeble and evasive and therefore right up your street but enough to get Islington dampening their pants in excitement.

  • The_Missing_Think

    “As for immigrants, most want to work not scrounge.”

    Nine bullsh*t words on the second biggest issue in society.

    Is that it, is that the best you can do?

  • trapezium

    So I see it now has a name, as it ought.

    The British Revolt.

  • Stuart Syvret

    Nick, you say this, “I predict the law will be next”. I have no doubt you’ve hit-the-target with that prediction. As I’ve written in another context, “Questioning the competence – let alone the probity – of the judiciary is the last great taboo in the British dialogue with power. Even serious national newspapers and anti-authoritarian journalists shy away from the question.”

    That train is coming down the tracks.

    Whisper it – British judicial corruption.

    And – really – when you pause to think about it, for even a moment, how could it be other?

    The ultimate enforcer of the rule-of-law – the defender and protector of the millions of ordinary people up & down the country – is the judiciary.

    And where has that judiciary been in so many of these shocking scandals which, taken together, show corruption to be endemic in British public administration? Hillsborough, Orgreave, Savile, the murder of Daniel Morgan, phone-hacking, the unlawful suspension of Jersey’s Police Chief?

    If there is a unifying factor in all those scandals, an underlying cause, it is that the proper rule-of-law was not made to prevail in timely or effective ways.

    So far, the administration of justice in this country has escaped all critical scrutiny. That omission must now end, if, as a nation we are serious about addressing the systemic failures of accountability – failure of basic checks & balances – that characterise the current plague of scandals. It’s time to take a long, critical look at the judiciary – the last great taboo in the British dialogue with power.

    • John Maloney

      Well said. The scandal of secret courts, and judicial cover ups in child snatching cases needs to hit the mainstream.

Can't find your Web ID? Click here