Heartening, the resolve of the many and the power of the few

I wanted to write a post about the protests that have taken place around the world as the olympic torch has been carried from nation to nation in a badly judged public relations exercise by the Chinese Administration.
When I got plane to return to the UK I saw the scenes that greeted the Olympic relay in London and I’ve got to say I have not seen such good news for a long time.
The attempts to put out the torch, to disrupt the ceremony, to embarass China and the UK government were in my view perfectly justified, well measured and eminently honourable acts of civil disobedience and I’d like to congratulate everyone who took part.
The fact that people were willing to get out and make their feelings perfectly clear was exceptionally heartening given that the situation in Tibet and the Human Rights abuses of the Chinese administration is a cause that deserves the full attention of all nations which claim to support the doctrine of universal human rights.
Of course the major disappointment was the conduct of our government and the conduct of our Prime Minister as well as the atrocious decision by UK security services to allow the torch to be escorted on UK streets by the so called ‘guardians of the flame’ who turned out to be nothing more than a bunch of Chinese Security Service thugs who had no place whatsoever taking jurisdiction in matters of security on UK streets. However if ever we need the proof that this administration has no time for matters of principle in the face of economic pragmatism then we have plenty in just this one situation.
But such a situation highlights the worrying nature of allowing economic issues to dictate foreign policy and to over ride not just priniciple but clear popular opposition to UK involvement in a given set of events.
It stands that taking the brakes off an economy and allowing a free market to run riot does not necessarily mean that the ‘right’ decisions are going to made and I think this is a mistake made by free marketeers in that whilst economics is a major factor in many aspects of human behaviour it is not the be all and the end all of mankind and to view the world as being so simple as to be able to function on all fronts with minimal interference in global markets is what you might call considerably niave.
So where I am going with this and what has free market policy got to do with Tibet and blue tracksuited thugs running through London? (mind you, that happens regardless of whether the Olympic relay is on or not)
The reason that the government and indeed most of the Western world will weather the storm of popular opposition to the Beijing Olympics is because financially it doesn’t make sense to boycott Chinese goods or break off political, economic deals over something so silly as the rights of a few monks in some backwater country commitment to financial prudence takes place over commitment to the Idealism of Human Rights.
Question is, would it be any different with a more restricted economy? Well I like to think yes it would, a more democratically controlled economy would be far more subject to the wills and wishes of the populace, not only would this mean that the protesters across the West would have an even greater recourse against the Chinese it would mean that they probably would not have got themselves all caught up in trade deals in the first place. it would appear that people really do care about the situation that many people end up in, and they really do wish to effect change but when they are utterly powerless in the face of a vast, powerful economic system that maintains a highly top down control structure and a commitment to stockholders over all else there is very little that they can do, yes we could try a total boycott of all goods that the Chinese are involved in but we cannot tell the government to back out of previously agreed trade deals because they ignore us. The reason they ignore us is because they are busy trying to keep business lobbyists happy. Additionally a boycott of Chinese Goods would be inefficient seeing as due to global labour markets and increased free trading 4% of total UK imports are from the Peoples Republic and I’m willing to bet that there is lot more that is not recorded as a direct import that nonetheless has some Chinese involvement. We’re getting stuck and the more we allow it to happen the more stuck we’re going to get.
As for the original involvement in Chinese trading affairs you ask the question that if so many people find the Chinese regime abhorrant and so many people wish to put boycotts in place and have as little to do with it as possible then why on earth is the UK so comfortable in bed with Beijing? I can only conclude that decisions are being made by other people who are more interested in profit margins than anything else. The peculiar dichotomy in Conservative idealogy being that whilst we’re all free to do what we want within reason and get on with our lives we still have to bow to the incredible power of the free market which in effect entrusts major policy and lifestyle decisions to boardrooms and that instead of being able to call an immediate vote and effect immediate change you have to undergo the rather doubtful process of ‘voting with your feet’ (or wallet more appropriately) which is highly reliant on your ability to do so which in turn is highly reliant on the financial circumstances you find yourself in.
Politically it is important to look at what the main parties are saying and whilst I’m well aware that the Liberal Democrats are saying the right thing because they can say just about anything and get away with it they are nonetheless saying the right thing and just for that they deserve a mention. Clearly any political party can be trusted as far as I can throw an adult elephant but involvement means an ability to have a say in what is done by a party.
So asides from an incomplete rant about the evils of the free market I’m still rather pleased at the level of opposition met by the Olympic relay team, I hope the feeling stays and I hope the feeling grows, the freedom to express oneself is an eminently glorious thing and when it exercised for the good of others it becomes something quite individualy honourable.