|
· True social justice requires both compassion and tolerance.
· True compassion should not be based on sentimentality, but on helping the socially excluded to change their lives, which may mean changing their behaviour.
· Likewise, true tolerance demands that the values and traditions of the majority be tolerated, as well as those of minorities.
· A truly inclusive society, based on proper compassion and tolerance, would not seek to help the excluded to change their lives and join mainstream society.
*****
For years the media have enjoyed regular Conservative bust-ups over Europe - not least at the autumn Party Conference. One of the greatest successes of William Hague's leadership of the Conservative Party has been the transformation of the Europe issue from a source of division to one of the Party's biggest electoral advantages. But political writers believe they have found a new split between so-called 'social conservatives' and 'social liberals'.
Unfortunately for the media, however, even the most commented upon people do not fall into distinct pigeon-holes. Steve Norris, for example, would generally be thought to be 'socially liberal' but his opposition to abortion is really a badge of the so-called 'authoritarian' camp. Ann Widdecombe's pro- life and pro-family Catholicism make her a natural 'social conservative' but her emphasis on encouraging a dialogue with other faith communities, mainly of course non-whites, is allegedly characteristic of 'one nation' Conservatism.
Seeking to identify factions within the Conservative Party, commentators are bandying about words like 'compassion', 'tolerance' and 'inclusion' without any attempt to explain what they mean or to describe how they relate. In the interests of better relations with our friends in the fourth estate we would like to offer a few definitions.
COMPASSION
Professor Marvin Olasky, the American writer, has done much in recent years to promote the cause of 'compassion'. To be 'compassionate', Olasky insists, means literally to suffer with those in need. Compassion has little to do with a sentimental sympathy for the poor or needy that is discharged by a remote exchange of alms, compulsorily extracted taxes or the shedding of occasional crocodile tears. Compassion is not a question of 'feeling good' but rather one of 'doing good'. It involves an active participation in helping those who are the subject of one's concern. It might mean fostering a child at risk; it might be a matter of regularly visiting a lonely neighbour; reading with an illiterate friend; or it could involve baby-sitting for a stressed-out single mum.
Compassion is about reaching those people who have been touched neither by prosperity nor by social welfare programmes. It is also as demanding of the 'recipient' as of the 'giver'. In exchange for active and personal assistance the recipient may have to be willing to make changes:- to stop drinking or gambling; to be willing to attend literacy classes; or to avoid contact with gang members. This echoes Jesus' compassionate declaration to the adulterous woman after he had gently forgiven her 'Go now and leave your life of sin' (John 8:11).
TOLERANCE
Our second key definition is 'tolerance'. A tolerant society will find space for people whose way of living falls outside of mainstream modes of behaviour and protect individual's rights to make free choices. Tolerance implies neither approval or confirmation.
It is vital that a differentiation is made between the behaviour and the agent of the behaviour; the Christian distinction between the sin and the sinner. Great respect should always be shown to individual people of every background. Made in the image of God, every person has a right to 'live peaceful and quiet lives' (1 Timothy 2:3). But that tolerance cannot extend to compromising the social mores of the mainstream in response to the aspirations and conduct of various minorities.
A society that, for example, endorsed or promoted serial parenting or alcoholism would quickly decay.
For a society to develop and grow, tolerance also should be a two-way street between each of its citizens. It is not just a question of a majority tolerating a minority but also of the minority respecting the fact that the majority, too, have interests and values which they are not prepared to compromise. Modern life involves a series of choices about education, relationships, attitudes to authority, consumption, career, where to live, which institutions to belong to and so on. Some choices tend to lead to conformity - others to an alternative lifestyle.
INCLUSION
Compassion and tolerance, properly understood, are necessary for a truly 'inclusive' society. By 'inclusive' we must be aiming for a society where more people enjoy the opportunities and privileges of the mainstream: a secure home, a reasonable income, a good education, time off, companionship, and the space to pursue the highest objectives of life. The old-fashioned socialists' belief that the state could provide all of these things is now widely rejected. More difficult for the political right is a need to accept that the market cannot guarantee them for everyone either. Certainly, the market economy has driven an enormous extension of opportunity and wealth across the world but even hundreds of thousands of Britons, perhaps millions, are excluded from the 'progress' of recent years which has delivered such a swollen middle class.
A genuinely 'inclusive' politics cannot be tokenistic. We cannot include the poor, the single parent family, the homeless, or the pensioner by simply saying that we respect them and shower them with soft, warm words. A genuinely compassionate and tolerant politics offers these people the possibility and means of enjoying the mainstream opportunities of our country.
Inclusion may require changes in behaviour or a renewal of aspiration, but those who want the benefits of mainstream culture need to acknowledge that there are certain rules that sustain the club. Those rules cover very basic things: lawfulness, faithfulness in relationships, honesty, thrift, neighbourliness and so on. You can certainly choose not to live by these rules in a free society but there are then limits on what you can then expect in return if the civilising instincts of a sustainable society are not to be taxed and frustrated to exhaustion.
A compassionate society will always be willing to help the excluded to enjoy mainstream opportunities but that will have to be at least in part on the majority's terms. An inclusive society will afford people of every gender, ethnic group and geographical background similar economic, educational and social opportunities. It can and must offer second and third and fourth chances but with every new chance new obligations come, too.
SOCIAL LIBERALISM
Insofar as 'social liberalism' implies an indifference to the maintenance of certain forms of behaviour it is the enemy of an inclusive society. Such 'social liberalism' will also ultimately endanger a compassionate and tolerant agenda if sustainable, civilising, community-building instincts are taxed, regulated and generally burdened by mistaken indulgence of minority choices.
POSTSCRIPT
Those who would have the Party build a US-style rainbow coalition need to examine the challenge of trying to appeal to a diverse population including, for example, deeply conservative ethnic minorities (e.g. Muslims and black Christian evangelicals), on the one hand, and gays and lesbians, on the other. Many voters resent the group politics of the Left and supported Thatcher, Major and now Hague because the Tory Party has the appeal of a being a broad church.
Unusually, perhaps, for an article on inclusive politics the focus has not been on the Conservative attitude to homosexuality. We would prefer an inclusive agenda to be built around those most excluded from mainstream life: those living in heavily disadvantaged communities, who are farthest away from the social and economic wealth of Britain. Such people do not have the choices, are unable to make the decisions or have the means or confidence to take the steps which can directly address the greatest burdens in their lives.
There is a direct link between economic and social inclusion. Those people who have the means to enter the market place are also able to part of the society of the market. The contrary is also true. There is a strong case for limiting both social and economic liberalism in order that a set of consistent and common values can prevail and the mainstream's expectations made clear.
By setting out the parameters of inclusion it is easier for Government to recognise those who are excluded and then address their needs with local solutions. It is hoped that Britain's faith-based organisations will play an increasing role in identifying and addressing those situations.
In contrast, a liberal agenda is only able to offer an inherently unstable environment with an unknown character and dynamic. At some point the state is always required to take responsibility for its action. In the case of social, as with economic, liberalism the state's obligation arises when it is time to pick up the pieces.
Related links
The CCF belief in personal responsibility and social justice
The ccfwebsite.com briefing on poverty
| |
