A nation is successful and productive when the people are free; organised and collective countries, such as China, might experience phenomenal economic growth, but the perpetuation of continuous positive economic activity is vulnerable to civil unrest and rebellions. If the workers are revolutionary; seeking better pay, working conditions and basic democratic rights, it can effect the confidence of investors.
Unstable countries result in unstable markets.
Britain, unlike the rest of Europe, has a stable political system. The coalition experiences turbulences and periods of uncooperative behaviour, but it maintains a strong majority in the Commons. Opposition MP’s cannot influence the agenda without government rebellions. An unacknowledged reason for low bond yields. The British economy might not be comfortable and productive, but the government is not on the verge of collapse.
But a strong government does not necessarily equal a strong society; forgive me for paraphrasing Marx, but he was genuinely correct in asserting the state and society are separate entities and the state does not influence society. I think it is morally wrong for the state to create any ‘perfect’ society – predominately because Mussolini, Mosley, Hitler, Stalin and Mao actively sought to establish a utopia.
Of course, as history tells us, millions tend to die in the process. Brutally.
Building a liberal democracy should be organic; the population should not be coerced into accepting a state sanctify option. Where the people wish to be free – economic or social – then the people should be liberated. Individuals should influence the direction of society and economy; decision making should be devolved to local level – it would ensure the country is more stable during volatile markets.
I know this philosophy contradicts the title and advocates an argument against ‘building’ a certain outcome. Progressive Liberal Democrats believe a state can solve most problems and be a significant figurehead (which kinda contradicts liberalism), but fail to recognise the public tend not to like government-backed changed. The jury is still out on Swiss style direct democracy, with referendums trigging debates and potential legislation in Parliament. Pre-legislative referendums were used by some ungodly regimes to undermine the democratic process; rightly, many liberals are sceptical on its introduction.
As a party, we must lay out what we like a future Britain to be; unlike Labour and Conservatives we must ensure the building process, if you will, will be led by the people and not the state. The premise should be a nation, in which the individual is free both economically and socially, with society being as equally stable as the political system and the markets.