Totalitarianism does not arise spontaneously. It arrives instead by a series of steps, each one small enough; and, like the journey of a thousand miles that begins with a single step, many small steps can take us a long way from home; until one day we arrive in a strange world where the pigs walk on two legs, all are equal, but some more so that others, and the clocks strike thirteen.
One of the tenets of totalitarianism is the central importance of the State, and it is but a short step from that central importance to move towards notions of enemies of the State, and so to traitors in our midst. And so it is that the machinery of totalitarianism seeks to know the each and every detail about the lives of each and every one of us, lest we be the traitor in the midst. We move from a liberal default position of trust, to one of mistrust, and then distrust. No one can be trusted at face value; only the State can collect the data and decide who is trustworthy and, who is not.
Each step, the State tells us, is necessary, to protect us from our enemies in our midst. In each case, the area of control is discrete. It is only when we step back, and look at the overall picture, at the large number of State surveillance and control schemes, that we can see the all pervasive nature and extent of the Government control that has been forced, and is being forced, upon us. If we were to take each scheme, and count it a step, and place them end to end, we would find ourselves far further down that road to totalitarian hell than we had imagined.
We already have, or are about to have:
• the retention of the DNA of innocent people (they’ll probably turn out to be criminals anyway).
• the Vetting and Barring Scheme (anyone in contact with other people’s children is a paedophile until proved otherwise)
• revalidation for doctors (all doctors are dangerous quacks until approved by the State).
There are many more that Dr No is aware of; no doubt there are others that he does not know of.
Each one, of itself, might seem reasonable to some; but taken together we see the pervasiveness in nature and extent; the assumptions of distrust, the collection of personal data to be held by the State; and in time the culture of distrust becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. We are all traitors now – unless, that is, we can demonstrate our unswerving allegiance to the State.
And so we come see the formation of the secret police, and the assembly of armies of informers. Snitching is our State duty and ‘soft’ intelligence – intelligence so soft you can poke a finger through it – becomes the currency of control. And the informer is given status and reward by the State for doing his duty.
Of course, we Brits couldn’t go that far, could we? Oh yes we could. It is being considered right here, right now. Only last week it emerged that the Government is considering manifesto proposals to reward benefit fraud sneaks with cash-backs.
It seems the clocks are already striking thirteen in Downing Street.
Benefit “cheats” – thanks for the real world examples. Providing ‘opportunities’ for neighbour to spy on neighbour – and be rewarded for so doing – is highly toxic. It is a significant step on the creep towards a police state.
Likewise preferring the ‘assessment’ of a government paid hired gun over an individual’s own GP/consultant demonstrates centralisation of control. Sure, some doctors may be soft touches (and so in fact not really doing the best for their patient), but I and I am sure the great majority of doctors will encourage a patient back to work when we think that is the right thing to do, just as we will sign them off when that is the right thing to do.
We now have a surveillance system that the Stasi would be proud of
We also have the laws to enforce such things
Time to fight back by denying the GMC their fee en masse Their final salary pension would cripple them within two months
Freed – “We now have a surveillance system that the Stasi would be proud of“: exactly. Central unaccountable Government appointed HQ, a network of informers (so called appraisers) and controllers (so called responsible officers) and a fundamental rule shift: you will not be allowed to continue practising medicine unless and until your appraiser, controller and Stasi HQ all say you can.
Withholding fees – Dr No thinks this may well be what we use to bring down the GMC. He is not sure that it needs to be a mass withholding either. Ten percent? Fifteen Percent? And what about the rest of the profession, who are still paying fees? At some point there will be a critical mass effect: there will be sufficient safety in numbers amongst the fee withholders for the rest to feel they too can stop paying.
Before that happens, we need to have ready whatever will replace the GMC. But that should not be difficult. Most doctors are not stupid. We should be able to put something together that is simple, effective, transparent and fair and (unlike the GMC) has the confidence of the public.
(From your link.)
“One Glasgow resident told Murphy he was fed up with going to work at eight in the morning knowing the man in the flat above was not – but would still be keeping him awake at two in the morning.”
This about sums it up. This is just the sort of person that will be attracted by this scheme. He doesn’t like the fact that his unemployed neighbour keeps him awake. No mention of any sort of fraud, just that the resident is “fed up” with being kept awake.
A friend of mine is on benefits. Someone accused her of cheating and her benefits were suspended for a whole year whilst she was investigated and established her innocence. A year is a long time to live off loans, credit cards, gifts from friends and relatives, selling off your possessions, running up debts on catalogues etc.
I know that there are people that don’t think that I should be on benefits. They don’t see me on a bad day and they can’t see problems that don’t show on the outside. The last thing I need is malicious people given an incentive to make my life a misery whilst I’m investigated.
Ironically, this comes from the same government that is employing not only doctors but nurses and physiotherapists to carry out tick-box protocol assessments for ESA that override what the claimant’s own GP and consultant have to say on their fitness for work.
So let’s believe the grasses and the tick-box protocols and not the patient’s own doctors. That will make for a fair system, won’t it?
I’ve nicked this (with credits). Great site.
Keep writing, please.