Trussell Trust sup with the devil

[max]

 

And max wonders whether I would be happier donating at the Coop? Well the answer is 'no'. My contention is that the very concept of the foodbank is unsatisfactory. I advocate that those of us who are concerned about such issues (and I like to think that this means all of us) should be active in resisting the whole system of corporate exploitation and tax abuse rather than spending our time encouraging the shoppers to put yet more money into the tills of the volume retailers.

 

Your assumption here is that it's an either or situation. Either you volunteer to help those who find themselves in need or be active in resisting the system.

 

Which do you do?

[Staunton]

max wishes to know which I choose, charity or activism - well I do believe very strongly that it really is an either/or situation. Being acutely conscious of the difficulties in such a perspective – resistance being useless in the face of overwhelming levels of corporate sleaze and successive governments fixing the system in favour of wealth and profit - I do in fact engage in both. However, my giving and voluntary efforts always generate an overwhelming sense of personal dissatisfaction, since I am aware that every penny of donation or ounce of energy on my part represents but an insignificant fraction of the finance and effort needed to maintain a just society, and shall never be sufficient to mitigate the enormous harm done by the supermarkets (and the other corporate institutions that fleece the system). These businesses that sit in the heart of our localities, vacuuming our monies straight off shore via their tills and using their scale advantage to overwhelm local competition, are nothing more than a drain on the wealth and energy of our towns and cities as they routinely abuse the tax system, engage in sharp practice towards their suppliers, pay no heed to environmental factors, and use exploitative employment techniques.

 

sheff6danny is quite right to point out that volunteering is by no means a Conservative idea. Indeed voluntary work has a long and varied history. However, its promotion by David Cameron as a means of encouraging the meeting of the basic needs of the most vulnerable in our communities was cynical. Cameron and his cronies did nothing to challenge tax abuse, which means tens of £billions per year slipping quietly off shore instead of funding our services and welfare provision (which would in turn put cash into local economies). Of course Cameron was not going to change a system that was working as planned – after all he and his family benefit personally from tax abuse. Neither can we point to any reduction of the negative aspects of contemporary volunteering by referring to Tony Blair's flirt with the principle of 'active community', an idea that he culled from Bill Clinton, since Blair was himself an arch neoliberal, dedicated to restructuring society in line with free-market dogma and corporate profit.

 

Both max and sheff6danny's points are interesting, and I shall be reflecting further on the history of charities and voluntary organisations. Having been active in campaigning with no ultimate impact (I maintain that UKUncut can be proud of its activities since they firmly established the theme of tax abuse in the public domain), I must acknowledge that Messrs Osborne, Gauke and Cameron and their executive friends in the City of London simply had to wait for the fuss to die down before returning to business as usual. I am acutely conscious that such action is futile, but neither can I see myself coming to terms with the structural role of charitable giving and voluntary work whilst the corporations and the millionaires continue to cheat the system.

Edited December 3, 2017 by Staunton