A few weeks ago the Honourable Member for Brent Central was temporarily banished from the Chamber for refusing to comply with the required rules of etiquette.
A bit like being sent to your room for calling your elderly relative fat. . . Or perhaps not; for that’s more a matter of opinion, of kindness and compassion and, indeed, of etiquette. This was altogether different, more akin to breaking the sumptuary laws once employed to keep us in our respective places. After all, there’s a charade to be maintained; a pretence to distinction and honour. . .
I believe Ms Butler was otherwise entirely appropriate in her behaviour. As far as I can tell, she didn’t characterise the the Prime Minister as a liar, but simply observed that he had lied; repeatedly; and she furnished the necessary evidence. A demonstrable statement of fact which was, apparently, widely acknowledged.
Nonetheless, she hadn’t played the game – a failure, as she noted, far more reprehensible than merely misleading the public. Never mind that we can all see through the Emperor’s new clothes, the myth must be preserved.
But why persist with the masquerade?
Well probably, and despite the fact that this is a particularly silly example, because it’s the human (and the British) way. Let’s face it, we still populate our establishment with all that vestigial panoply of a moribund hierarchy. Lords and ladies, barons, earls and all the rest: ersatz distinction founded upon privilege and patronage. An apparent need to cement the edifice with sustaining accolades and divisive eminence.
There’s an emotional commitment to tribal consensus and hierarchy, to conformity; security in an embrace of the familiar. Indeed, anything to avoid the latent perils, the uncertainties that might be released through an open mind with clear and critical thought. There’s risk in confronting reality – blinkered complacency is so much safer. Keep your head down and play along for an easy life.
So we turn a blind eye to the Emperor’s exposure and indulge his need for adulation, power and dominance. Some in the crowd might struggle with the deception, but they, and those who blurt out the obvious, will be sidelined by a deferential inertia that maintains the reassuring hegemony. Lip service the order of the day.
Too many are invested in the status quo – the Emperor and his cohorts are well served. Sufficient suspension of reason affords a refuge for despotic authority. Mere declaration gains proxy for coherence and logic. Dominion is wrapped in protocol and procedure; threat and penalty keep challenge at bay.
Some years ago now, I had occasion to write to a firm of lawyers in Scotland. They had, on behalf of their client, performed a particularly cruel and vicious attack on a close friend. The action was groundless and though ostensibly intended to achieve some slight territorial advantage was perhaps equally designed to assuage the burden of a fragile ego. The method employed was to intimidate with entirely fictitious allegations and thus create a paralysing sense of fear and alarm. In this state, and lacking the resources to challenge, the only option was for my friend to concede an agreement. With threats of unsustainable expense and even imprisonment, she was bullied into compliance.
I wrote because amongst the numerous unfounded allegations were various misrepresentations and erroneous and incoherent statements of fact for which the lawyer could not evade responsibility. Most astonishing was an undisguised misrepresentation of the proper reading of a Title Plan. But, needless to say, there was a refusal to engage with any issues and simply a bland assurance that neither practitioner nor firm would ever deliberately mislead the court. . .
There’s no mechanism for challenge other than playing their game – if you have the means! Scottish Legal Complaints subscribe to the same page (when they get around to it); offering an assortment of straw men pressing incompetent rationale and logical fallacy to burnish an evident predisposition. No resort then, other than the Court of Sessions (which comes with a warning of more expense). So no redress; no real scrutiny. A parasitic institution all wrapped up in its own terms with a degree of power out of all proportion to any accountability.
Without vigilance the essential institutions of civilised existence so easily succumb to inertia and personal ambition. There will always be those looking to profit at the expense of others and the challenge is to design out any opportunity for toxic hierarchy. But vigilance is the key; and a willingness for those with the authority and means, to put aside narrow self interest for the wider good and acknowledge and act upon emergent shortcoming. Silence is betrayal and complicity in the chaos; it just promotes the pantomime.
And there are examples:
In Scotland houses for sale come with the Single Survey; an overview of the condition of the structure. When the survey seems to have overlooked several shortcomings, there’s naturally an element of dissatisfaction. Of course, remedial action can be taken to resolve the issues – but that’s not the point of the story.
A typical timber frame structure with a rendered masonry veneer – the intervening cavity requires an airflow to guard against fungal decay. There is, therefore, a requirement for external vents to be fitted throughout the envelope. It becomes apparent, however, that these vents are often treated as no other than cosmetic embellishment. They appear simply to be pushed into previously buttered mortar joints and then further compromised by render and paint.
When such a matter, along with other issues, was taken up with Building Control, the firm of surveyors, and subsequently the Ombudsman, it produced a variety of (written) response:
Building control emphasised the importance of maintaining ventilation even in exposed locations and quoted the relevant technical standards. The RICS surveyor, however, claimed an official policy that didn’t require vents in exposed positions. Finally, the Ombudsman characterised this clear discrepancy as merely a “shortfall in reporting”.
A cursory observation would suggest it is not unusual to find properties in the area fitted with non-functioning vents. Why fit vents if not required, and only to cover them? Why characterise a significant conflict of advice as just a reporting shortfall? It’s this deficit of rigour, this casual indifference for veracity, that can and does bring disaster.
And, without labouring the issue, what of a Land Registration regime (Scotland) that would seek to discharge a statutory duty to define the boundaries to every registered plot by means of a shifting base map subject to regular updates? Or the Crofting Commission, similarly imposing definitive dimensions to Croft Lands? Yes, there are procedures and conventions to mitigate the difficulties but even a brief acquaintance with the purchase of property in these areas reveals the clear scope for conflict and legal intervention. Legislative ineptitude benefiting none but the legal community.
And there’s the frustration; having to contend with the inane and self-serving nonsense so often substituted for reason and sound governance. But why say what you mean when a euphemism is more palatable? Why tell the truth when you might get away with a convenient lie? Why struggle with reality when the facade is so much more beguiling? After all, Intellectual rigour is really quite tedious and can be such an inconvenient impediment to more immediate gratification.
I won’t speculate as to chicken or egg but the adversarial and litigious legal system is so well accommodated, it is difficult to see it as other than central to our increasingly dysfunctional society. All the complex and nuanced needs for justice exploited by a facile game of winners and losers. A business model that cares little for facts or fairness; that peddles cover-up over clarity; scapegoat over authenticity; and, in condemning candour, denies us all the opportunity to learn and grow. Opportunistic deceit is becoming a cultural norm and, as has been noted (for millennia), whenever dissembling becomes the order of the day, pursuit of truth and reason just courts vilification.
So don’t fall prey to the snake oil salesman; even if he appears to believe in his product you don’t have to swallow it down. Face the facts; put it to the test; think for yourself. And let’s call a lie a lie; Members who dissemble and mislead aren’t honourable and do us all a disservice. But it seems we have become inured and there appears now almost an acceptance, an expectation, of the underhand.
Nevertheless the mechanisms of democracy are, by all accounts, still in place; so exercise your rights. That single vote is the only lever available to many, the only chance to be heard however slight. And don’t squander on tribal loyalties; look beyond the charades, dismiss the fairy tales, see things as they really are and don’t indulge those who would abuse their privilege and neglect their responsibilities, otherwise we’re all lost.
We are facing existential threats on an unprecedented scale. Pandemic; climate change; totally unsustainable demands on the earth; and we waste time and energy on partisan posturing; demands for independence when we have never been more interdependent; allegiance to arcane difference furthering neglect of the common humanity. Survival takes more than defensive rhetoric, or hubris and grandiose aspiration. The challenges are too big for play-acting and make-believe.
And so, let us prey. .
Let us prey on the gullible and the vulnerable,
let us prey on those who search for meaning.
Let us fill their minds with guilt and fear,
but offer the promise of redemption and salvation.
For blind obedience and complicity will relieve them of any need to think for themselves.
And their devotion will bring forth comfort in divine delusions of immortality and eternity.
Or, indeed, any delusion you care to mention,
or we can sell you,
but don’t expect your money back.
Outing The Pathology 