The problem with the Prime Minister's "Broken Society" meme is that it's not obvious society is more broken now than it always has been. Sure, there are serious problems and some of them are deep-rooted and, perhaps, the overall level of hopeless venality is higher than once it was but, tempting though it is to conclude this might be likely, the fact remains we are much more likely to be aware of contemporary problems and equally likely to gloss over the problems of past ages.
This is especially obviously the case if we pause to consider aspects of modern Britain that, once unthinkable, have become so commonplace we sometimes forget how much better life is now in so many ways for so many people. Millions of women, for instance, have opportunities and choices unavailable to past generations. Something similar might be said of "minority Britain" and gays and lesbians.
Are there problems? Of course there are. Too many Britons lead dull and frustrated lives. Too many children are trapped in schools ill-equipped to serve them properly. Too many struggle to find satisfying or dignifying work. Too many are dependent upon welfare. Too many lead sadly unfulfilling lives.
Nevertheless it is easy to forget that for a long time and for millions of people life was hard, brutish and short. Nor is it obvious that things are worse than they were in, say, the 1970s or early 80s. On the contrary and despite the national penchant for grumbling, there are good reasons to think many things are much better and that this is, for the time being anyway, a kinder, more tolerant, open, liberal society than it ever was before.
And as Chris Cook points out, all this talk of "moral collapse" requires us to ignore ample evidence that some things have been getting better:
Perhaps the statistics are wrong or misleading. Clearly they're not enough to convince many people that many things are actually better than they once were. The desire to think the past a different country where they did things better is always strong. And doubtless some things have been lost since those halcyon post-war days. But, again, that's not the whole picture.
For instance: stable families and marriage are good things. But it's also good that women are so much less likely to be trapped in abusive marriages. It's a good thing that domestic violence has been stigmatised. A good thing too that rape is no longer viewed so indulgently as once it was. And it's a good thing that homosexuality is no longer grounds for imprisonment.
Equally, the idea of the Bobbie on the beat, of Dixon of Dock Green and all the rest of it, is lovely. But it's also lovely that it's no longer thought acceptable for the police to beat confessions out of suspects, nor for them to fit up innocent people because it's easy or convenient to do so. And it's grand that the state no longer executes innocent prisoners.
The present moral panic will, one hopes, pass. We look back on past outbreaks of hysteria and wonder why our predecessors were so exercised by trivial concerns. How silly they look, we say, even as our newspapers try to persuade us that they were all so much more sensible and serious back then. Perhaps they were but I'm not sure that's so. Because if it's not one thing it's another thing and one constant is that the press and political classes are always scared of, or revolted by, whatever it is that passes for youth culture at any given point.
Maybe it is worse today but the Doom and Gloom brigade has never been short of volunteers. We've always been headed to hell. So hats-off to Bagehot for this post which offers a bracing catalogue of past episodes of moral panic. Among the choice cuts, many of them culled from a sadly out-of-print-but-available-second-hand book by Geoffrey Pearson called Hooligan: A History of Respectable Fears. Bagehot asks Just what happens if we take a time machine back three decades, to the time before the revolutionary transformation identified by Melanie Phillips? Well, this:
There's much, much more reaching back to the 18th century, taking in the threat of silent films, music halls, panics about "garrotting", the problem of working mothers and much, much else besides."Hooligan" compares the 1958 and 1978 Conservative Party annual conferences. In 1978, buffetted by calls from the floor for a return to the birch and "Saturday night floggings" for football hooligans, it notes, the future home secretary William Whitelaw pledged a new regime of short-sharp-shock Detention Centres modelled on army discipline.And in 1958? The agenda included a debate on a "disturbing increase in criminal offences", and speakers asserting that "our wives and mothers, if they are left alone in the house at night, are frightened to open their doors", and that "over the past 25 years we in this country, through misguided sentiment, have cast aside the word "discipline", and now we are suffering from it". Delegates fumed over the "leniency" of modern courts and the way that young people were "no longer frightened of the police". Over calls from the floor for a return to flogging, the home secretary R A Butler pledged a programme of building short-sharp-shock Detention Centres, wherein "there should be a maximum of hard work and a minimum of amusement."
Still, no African-American rap music to corrupt the young, at least. Alas, "Hooligan" notes, the country was in the grip of a moral panic about rock and roll. In a 1956 front page editorial, headlined "Rock 'n Roll Babies" the Daily Mail declared:
It is deplorable. It is tribal. And it is from America. It follows rag-time, blues, dixie, jazz, hot cha-cha and the boogie-woogie, which surely originated in the jungle. We sometimes wonder whether this is the negro's revenge.
What of parents, surely free to smack and belt their way to discipline in those days?Not according to the Recorder of Bradford, Frank Beverley, recorded in his law court in 1951 inveighing on the crimes that could be traced to poor parenting:
Parents at this time, unfortunately, do not take sufficient care in bringing up their children. They expect someone else to be responsible.Back to 1932, and a guide to the work of boys' clubs lamented:
The passing of parental authority, defiance of pre-war conventions, the absence of restraint, the wildness of extremes, the confusion of unrelated liberties, the wholesale drift away from churches.
The point is less that these panics seem quaint now but that they were taken dreadfully seriously at the time. We might, then, consider whether our own response to these latest panics will one day be judged as odd or silly as so many of these from our past. Again, these were tumults thought likely to pull apart the fibres of British society. And yet society survived and even, sometimes, thrived.
Again, none of this means there are not serious issues that need attention. But a measure of perspective may be helpful. No reforms can ever produce total success and, alas, there will always be parts of society untouched by progress. That does not mean we should cut our losses or abandon them, merely that in all societies, regardless of time and circumstance, some have been left behind and failure is a reliably constant a feature of the human condition. So, of course, has moral panic.
Filed under: Britain (738 more articles) , History (518 more articles) , O Tempora, O Mores (186 more articles) , Panic (2 more articles) , Riots (97 more articles)
Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based
Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (15)
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
1 The unions versus the Department for Education — continued - Peter Hoskin
2 Why reason doesn’t apply to the Eurozone - Fraser Nelson
3 Cameron can no longer laugh off Ed - James Forsyth
4 The unions' lazy opposition to schools reform - Peter Hoskin
5 The strains on the Cameron-Hilton relationship - James Forsyth
Andrew Sullivan
Ben Smith
Charles Crawford
Chris Dillow
Claudia Massie
Dan Drezner
Daniel Larison
Dave Weigel
Ezra Klein
French Politics
Global Guerrilas (John Robb)
Henry Porter
James Fallows
Julian Sanchez
Kerry Howley
Kevin Drum
League of Ordinary Gentlemen
Marc Ambinder
Matt Zeitlin
Matthew Yglesias
Megan McArdle
More than Mind Games
Mr Eugenides
Norm Geras
Our Kingdom
Outside the Beltway
Radley Balko
Reason: Hit&Run
Rod Dreher
Samizdata
Scottish Unionist
SNP Tactical Voting
The American Scene
The Plank
Tim Worstall
Toby Harnden
Will Wilkinson
Charlotte Gore
Iain Martin
Hopi Sen
Liberal Vision
Left Back in the Changing Room
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Ian Walker
August 17th, 2011 1:06am Report this commentThe BCS doesn't tell the whole story. For instance, if people are too afraid to go out at night, then street crime will naturally fall (because there are fewer potential victims). So reducing bobbies on the beat will improve the statistics, but at a cost to society overall (depending on whether you consider the right to freely walk the highways and byways without fear of assault a good thing or not)
john Little
August 17th, 2011 3:28am Report this commentYour point being? Most of the instances you cite about the bad aspects of earlier times, are already acknowledged as such by even the most trenchant conservative commentators. Also, it's probable that the roots of many of todays problems with young people were already stirring in the undergrowth in the late 50's. But to glibly imply that last weeks events were somehow, certainly bad, but not much worse than has always been the case seems strangely perverse.
Doppelganger
August 17th, 2011 6:27am Report this commentFor some reason whenever "moral panic" is mentioned, I begin to turn off.
Tom Gallagher
August 17th, 2011 6:50am Report this commentWhy sure Alex, last week's unpleasantness needs to be seen in the long sweep of history and then its essential triviality can be revealed for all to see.
From your Scottish version of the rolling Tuscan hills, your pronoucements about social conditions in our cities are as relevant as Queen Victoria pronouncing on the conditions of 19th century chimney sweeps.
There were major improvements in public behaviour which lasted for almost a century down to the 1970s; the climate was so secure that people the worldover saw Britain as a place of safety and stability; Roger Scruton's England an Elegy spells it out very well.
You are like an unscrupulous landlord content to see his property turn in to a festering slum because you will stll be paid and handsomely at that.
It's no coincidence that like Gordon Brown, and indeed your fiecely ambitious editor you are a Scot: self-righteous, inflexible ready to find excuses and justifications for the unacceptable national conditions because as an old Calvinist would say, they are predestined.
It was in England, not its northern partner in industrialisation and empire, where the chief impetus for social reform came. The 19th century Massies and their ilk were content to process to the Kirk on Sunday and proclaim that it was God's will that the poor will always be with us.
Obviously you don't do God but your Bourbon reactionary view in the face of chronic disorder suggests that you should be spinning your web of fantasy in ancien regime rags like the Guardian and Independent.
normanc
August 17th, 2011 7:00am Report this commentAs Alan Clarke said when talking about the fitba, back in the day we'd have given this element a redcoat and a rifle then shipped them off to some far flung corner to help build an empire.
andrew kerins
August 17th, 2011 8:13am Report this commentThe thinking behind this post; we have always had these problems is wrong.
None of the comparisons cited led to the police losing control of the streets of large parts of London and to four people being murdered - trying to protect their family and property in the absence of police.
To use a historical parallel and risk falling foul of Godwin's Law;
At the end of the 19th and start of the 20th century there were many 'scares' which suggested Germany was about to invade.
The fact that these were fantasy did not mean that in 1940 (possibly also in 1914) fears of a German invasion amounted to 'moral panic' .
cuffleyburgers
August 17th, 2011 10:14am Report this commentWhiff of complacency there Alex...
Just for the record, progress is not achieved by patting oneself contently on the stomach - it is achieved at being angered by the obviously crappiness of what is all around and consumed by a desire to fix it.
The key message to emerge from the recent festivities was the utter failure of centralization be it in plicing, education or welfare - unfortunately our government or rather the civil service are too set in therir ways to draw the correct conclusion and so they will undoubtedly make the situation worse.
In my view the situation is decidedly grim. To be only where we are now despite cneturies of progress is an appalling indictment of the failure of government.
I don't know about you, but it makes me furious.
Mac
August 17th, 2011 10:20am Report this commentObviously flogging is too good for today's youth.
Grassmarket
August 17th, 2011 10:42am Report this commentAnd it's worth remembering that the 1958 Conservative Conference you refer to took place against the background of the first Notting Hill race riots, which the Government was perfectly correct to be concerned about, since they raised the spectre of mass racial violence.
Patricia
August 17th, 2011 11:52am Report this commentAlex mentions, quite rightly, that millions of women now have so mamy choices open to them. Why then do so many choose to spend their lives a la the victims in Jeremy Kyle shows ?
Axstane
August 17th, 2011 1:35pm Report this commentOnce again for those with short memories the British Crime Survey excludes by or against children under age 16, murders and most frauds. So, as a measure of total crime it is bullshit.
A fair proportion of reported crime used to be vehicle theft. The advent of transponder technology now makes it very difficult to steal a vehicle except by hijacking or obtaining access to the keys. That has taken thousands of crimes out of the picture.
Those who quote statistics must understand statistics.
Kennybhoy
August 17th, 2011 2:28pm Report this commentBCS? rotflmfao
Just speak to anyone who works in a large city NHS trust you silly man.
Baron
August 17th, 2011 2:40pm Report this commentdunno Alex, whether the point you’re labouring here cuts it, in the view of the poorly educated Slav, the big difference between rioting then and now is the latter crowds looked as if they think it’s their uman Right to break, burn things, pilfer, be violent.
Baron
August 17th, 2011 2:47pm Report this commentPatricia knows she is making a valid point: “Why then do so many (women) choose to spend their lives a la the victims in Jeremy Kyle shows”, she asks.
Could Baron ask Patricia, who’s responsible for so many women choosing to spend their lives a la victims in Jeremy Kyle shows? Moi?
N J Mayes
August 17th, 2011 3:39pm Report this commentAs much as I tend to disapprove of it-was-ever-thusery, I do remember from my social history days at uni some fun anecdotes in that book. My favourite was the report of a 'south London cowboy', some time in the 1980s, arrested for lassooing passing cyclists.
Back to top