• Professor Richard Wilkinson’s take on the riots
  
• Other articles that may be of interest
• Trust and inequality
  
• Take action

The disturbing riots that took place across England in early August demand sober analysis – as well as positive ideas
that can prevent these scenes from being repeated.

We (along with many other organisations) are working hard to ensure that perspectives on inequality form an important part of the debate. For the latest coverage you can visit our facebook page and you might like to watch Richard
Wilkinson interviewed on US television, in this 8-minute clip:

Richard makes many of the same points in an article for the Islington Herald Tribune and for Channel 4. You might also be interested in reading a piece that Richard wrote with Kate Pickett for the New Statesman’s recent feature: Family Breakdown and the Riots.

In the video, Richard explains that life in our unequal society has become increasingly about status competition, often expressed through consumerism. Much of the looting which took place during the riots involved people stealing things which confer status in their communities or in wider society, but which they could not afford to buy.

Richard also points to the widespread breakdown of trust in society. Scenes of looting on our streets do not help, but nor does the expenses scandal in which many MPs helped themselves to what they could get away with. For further discussion of the evidence relating to trust in unequal societies, please see the section on Trust & Community Life.

Other articles

We are glad to see that many responses to the riots are drawing these links, pointing to the damaging consequences of large income disparities and exploring what we could gain as individuals and as a society if we reduce the gap between rich and poor.

We have heard much about how the riots indicate a perceived lack of moral values, but Peter Oborne in the Telegraph emphasises that the “pure criminality” on the streets cannot be separated from what he terms “the moral disintegration in the highest ranks of modern British society”.

Our sister organisation One Society argues that a lack of moral responsibility and inequality are not mutually exclusive explanations of the causes of unrest but are in fact connected, as “smash and grab morality” is more likely in more unequal societies.

Camila Batmanghelidjh writes in the Independent about the socialisation of many young people in London.

It’s not one occasional attack on dignity, it’s a repeated humiliation, being continuously dispossessed in a society rich with possession…. Our leaders still speak about how protecting the community is vital. The trouble is, the deal has gone sour.

Trust and Inequality

The evidence indicates that any attempt to improve community life and foster a spirit of togetherness is doomed to failure if the gap between rich and poor continues to increase. Only by reducing inequality can we foster trust between all members of our society, and trust is needed to increase levels of civic engagement.

Data from the European and World Values Survey shows that there is a clear link between income inequality and affirmative responses to the statement “most people can be trusted”.

Sweden has the most trusting population, with 66% agreeing that most people can be trusted, while in unequal Portugal that figure is just 10%. Less than a third of Britons think that most people can be trusted.

With these figures in mind it is not surprising that there was widespread fear that the looting and violence would spread, but also not surprising that many richer people take refuge from real or imagined dangers by driving around in “chelsea tractors” and by living in “gated communities” shut off from social interaction with wider society.

Although the richest are those with the means to take these options, lack of trust and growing insecurity affect all of us, with fears of
losing social status influencing those on every rung of the social ladder. This was a significant factor in some of what we saw displayed on our television screens earlier this month.

Take action

There is so much we need to do. We know that we can’t mend our “broken society” without reducing inequality, but we must continue to get this message out far more widely.

It has been announced that there will be an inquiry into the causes of the riots – The Equality Trust will be responding, but
we need your help to ensure that the relevance of inequality is fully recognised and widely understood at this crucial time.

If you can, please take one or more of the following actions, directing people back to the evidence whenever possible:

1. write letters to your local or regional press – this is particularly important if you live in an area directly affected by the riots. It is quick and easy to do this through our website.

2. write letters to a national newspaper, this will be most effective and most likely to be printed if you can respond quickly to a
specific article. See for example this letter from Bill Kerry to the Guardian.

3. contribute to discussions on the social media sites that you use, and post comments responding to newspaper articles that appear online.

4. organise a local public meeting to discuss the riots in the context of inequality.

Although you will doubtless have your own points to make, some key aspects you may like to highlight are:

• Levels of crime and violence are strongly linked to inequality
  – see our recent Research Digest # 1.
• The UK has very low levels of trust – barely 1 in 3 of us thinks that “most other people can be trusted”.
• Low levels of trust undermine community cohesion and produce low levels of social capital (social interaction) which is a breeding ground for mistrust, misunderstanding and antagonism.
• High levels of health and social problems, more common in poorer communities anyway, are further exacerbated by inequality leading to desperation in some people.
• According to UNICEF, the UK is one of the worst places in the developed world to be a child or teenager.
• Inequality encourages status competition and a “me first” approach to life which can be witnessed across society – from bankers to MPs to looters.
• Greater equality would improve the overall quality of social relations in the UK and reduce the chances of a repeat of the riots.

We were delighted to receive a great response to our first photo competition, The Spirit Level: images of [in]equality. The 183 entries show above all else the diversity of interpretations of [in]equality and the extent to which inequality affects us all. We are pleased to announce the following winners:

Overall Winner: “Hopes and Dreams” by Rachael Fallis

Rachael included this caption with her entry:

I have a trust of people’s good intentions, and I think circumstances make a thief rather than greed. As the band James put it in one of their songs “If I didn’t see such riches I could live with being poor.”

The Spirit Level authors Kate Pickett and Richard Wilkinson, who were among the competition judges, congratulated Rachael for the way in which her photo addressed the links between inequality, crime and betting on the lottery. The facade of hope offered by the lottery is juxtaposed with the harsh reality of income inequality in the UK, in which vast pay gaps in businesses play an important role. Our professional photographer judges Mark Burton and Jeff Hubbard also praised the photo’s composition and framing.

In addition to the winning image, the judges chose two further photographs for special mention.

“Westminster Bridge” by Patrick Wilken

The judges admired the framing of the scene and the subtlety with which the subject of inequality in the photo had been captured.

“Cup Half Full” by Simon Holliday

The judges felt the juxtaposition in this image – between what life is like for some and what it is like for others – could hardly be more stark, while the photo also calls in question the role of advertising in perpetuating status competition between those of different incomes.

We would like to thank everyone who submitted a photo or helped promote the competition, and especially Mark Burton and Jeff Hubbard for lending their professional expertise. The Equality Trust will be holding another photo competition in 2012, where we will build on the experience of this year’s contest. In the meantime, please add us as a contact on flickr if you have an account, where we will also be adding photos of our local groups’ campaigning activities. Well done to the winners!

[this is my first blog post for The Equality Trust, where I've been volunteering for a few months now. The blog post can be viewed here and the groups guide here]

In order to successfuly campaign for a paradigm shift in the way we think about income equality in this country, and to successfully meet our stated aim of halving present levels of inequality, academic research and the work of the national Equality Trust office just won’t be enough.

Alongside our other activities, we also need to create a network of local groups up and down the country which will spread the message of The Spirit Level at every opportunity and undertake grass-roots campaigning on local issues. We’re immensely grateful to and proud of the local groups which have already formed and become active in their local communities; from London to Newport, Bristol to Scotland. You can take a look at the local groups already in action by clicking here.

To help existing local groups, but also to offer advice and guidance to those looking to start their own group, we’ve produced this short “groups guide”, which deals with issues ranging from networking with other organisations, holding meetings to dealing with the media or organising independent events or actions.

You can take a look at the groups guide here, where the whole guide as well as its constituent parts are available in both PDF and online formats.

To get a snippet of what local groups have been busy doing, take a look here.

Local equality campaigners have not only held public meetings, lobbied local councillors and written policy proposals; they have also directed street theatre, begun plans for local conferences and campaigned on wage ratios in their area. There are a multitude of campaigning activities out there – all of which we need – and by bringing about a diverse and vibrant network of local groups affiliated to The Equality Trust we can not only step closer to achieving our campaigning aims but also foster in microcosm the type of society we all want to live in: sharing, sociable, non-hierarchial, inclusive, creative and fun.

Moreover, there’s even research suggesting that campaigners and political activists lead happier, more fulfilled lives (as well as of course helping to bring about this state of affairs for society as a whole). What more are you waiting for?! Make it one of your new year’s resolutions to keep campaigning in a local group or join or start a new one, and help us make a better society.

Universities do not exist to make money or return a profit. Higher Education is not a business sector and should not be generally associated with words such as “investment”. However, it is a fact that nearly all universities hold investments in various companies, either directly, or through pension schemes – in this, they are no different from many charities and organisations such as the Church of England. Since they make these investments, why shouldn’t their values that are promoted through research and teaching also be evident in their investments? And why shouldn’t ethical investment be used to bring benefits to the wider society which universities are an important part of?

The priority of universities has to be to deliver excellent teaching that can promote social justice, advancement and intellectual freedom. Yet by investing in an array of arms traders, oil & gas companies, mining firms and many other ethically dubious enterprises, these noble aims of universities are effectively undermined and subverted; thus ethical investment also has to become a priority. Universities exist to improve human life and many of course conduct research into drugs and practices that can save lives and alleviate suffering; can it ever make sense to associate this purpose with the arms trade, which relies on warfare for it to be economically viable? Many universities have in the last decade established courses, degrees and research institutes dealing with the environment and climate change; yet many of these same universities persist to invest hundreds of thousands of pounds in oil & gas companies that are driving runaway climate change by fossil fuel extraction and using our money to do so (especially now that RBS, a huge financier of oil & gas companies, is now publicly-owned).

Divestment campaigns such as those aimed against the arms trade are however only part of ethical investment. Certain corporate practices should be avoided altogether, but through positive investment, universities can also actively seek out companies or organisations whose values and global impact matches that of their own. Thus by investing in renewable energy technology – they already conduct valuable research into it – this industry could be given a crucial boost (especially given the unwillingness of government to adequately support it) and universities would be investing for the social good, in the fight against climate change. Investments could also be channelled into co-operative or local organisations so that money is kept in the local area and in structures that are sustainable and fair.

Moreover, ethical investment need not have negative financial consequences for universities. Sectors such as the arms trade are heavily subsidised and rely on large, infrequent and highly competitive contracts; as such they make risky investments. As more stringent environmental regulations are introduced, those companies which are already sustainable will have to make very few changes, thus incurring no financial loss; the opposite applies for massive polluters. The Church of England has for instance reported increased returns on its investments since it adopted an ethical investment policy in 1994. By following in the footsteps of groups such as disarmUCL (with which I was involved), students can campaign not only for an end to their tuition fees funding warfare and climate change, but for universities which use their financial resources to promote progressive aims and social justice.

I did not attend the offical COP15 conference at the Bella Centre, nor had any wish to do so. There was something much more relevent going on in Copenhagen – the Klimaforum09. Billed as the “alternative conference”, it ran for over a fortnight, offering a meeting place and social forum for thousands of campaigners with countless discussions, debates, workshops and much more besides. I could only be there most of Saturday 12th & Sunday 13th but even in that short space of time it was the perfect riposte to the inaction, injustice and political machinations taking place a few kilometres away (and in which international NGOs were involved to a disturbing extent).

On the saturday I took part in a 100,000 strong demo from the centre of Copenhagen to the Bella Conference centre – alongside Nishma, hundreds of campaigners from Campaign Against Climate Change, and many many others! Marching (almost running in fact) at dusk alongside indigenous activists – several of whom I had met at Climate Camp or Shared Planet 09 – was the perfect rebuttal to the feelings of atomisation and desparation which I had been feeling about humankind and its ability to tackle climate change (this experience may not have been shared by the disgusting extra-legal arrests of hundreds of activists towards the back of the demo).

Taking part in a demo can often feel like merely going through the motions or pretending that you’re making a difference, but this was somehow different. While 100,000 people is a huge turnout, it still pales in comparison to for example the Iraq march in London in 2003. As we can see all too clearly from the outcome of the talks, our messages might have been heard but they cannot have been listened to. But what this weekend was all about was  people & communities coming together to deliver their own solutions to runaway climate change, channelling our outrage at what was happening behind the police batons and security fences in the Bella Centre.

As Vandana Shiva eloquently argued at Klimaforum, in the fight against climate change one of the best mitigation methods is also a critical way to fight rising emissions; living more sustainably. It is something which we have far greater control over than international climate treaties, but tackling what we consume – perhaps most importantly what we eat – wrests back power from the corporations who are driving runaway climate change, poisoning our bodies and the planet, and who very much set the agenda at COP15.

The project that Vandana Shiva presented at Klima Forum is an inspirational story of local activists, civil society group and local government working together to help promote change – check out the not particularly sexily named International Commission on The Future of Food and Agriculture. As she pointed out, not only men with white beards can write manifestoes, and I recommend reading this one: On Climate Change and The Future of Food Security. It is a very real example about how we can take back some control over our own future by refusing to wallow in self-pity or to excuse our inaction by righteous indignation at carbon traders and global “leaders” but actually getting our hands dirty in putting the solutions we want to see into practice. I hope that other campaigners who went to Copenhagen or who stayed at home during the last few weeks share this message or take a similar approach; our movement cannot allow despair and nihilism to take over after the pathetic outcome of COP15. Put simply: we cannot afford to give up.

———-

originally published on the people & planet blog, 23.12.09

——————————————

As most students at UCL belong to a generation which will undoubtedly experience at first hand the devastating consequences of runaway climate change – if global leaders fail us at Copenhagen in December and in 2010 – the student voice needs to be heard in the run-up to the historic summit. Given the excellent interdisciplinary work of the UCL Environment Institute, many students at UCL directly study courses dealing with issues surrounding climate change, but there are many more student activists at UCL.

For the last week UCL students have been running a Copenhagen Climate Week, with events planned to raise awareness about the summit and to bring home the urgency of the situation. Copenhagen was chosen to become a campaign week by a cross-campus vote of UCL students last academic year and students have already voted for another ‘Go Green Week’ to take place in the first week of February – no doubt the results of the Copenhagen summit will be high on the agenda.

Environmental campaigns at UCL owe a great amount to the UCL Union People & Planet Society, which meets weekly and has for four years campaigned on ethical and environmental issues, both local and international. For example, we hold events discussing the Copenhagen treaty but also concentrate on campaigning to make UCL a greener institution, and the society was central to UCL setting up a Sustainability Steering Committee.

UCL Union has become a more environmentally sustainable institution of late, but we still have some way to go. Students have constantly backed environmental policy at Union Council meetings or at Annual General Meetings covering issues from recycling and energy efficiency to a ban on union-funded domestic aviation and pushing UCL to employ an Environmental Director. The latest initiative to involve more students in environmental campaigning is the Environment & Ethics Forum.

Many UCL students will be among those marching through the streets of London on 5 December to take part in THE WAVE, which will be the largest climate change demonstration ever seen in the UK. Our voice will be added to thousands of others to demand a binding carbon emissions reduction treaty at Copenhagen; one that will set in place a fair and just transfer to a low-carbon economy, recognising the responsibility of richer nations to contribute more to this effort.

Not everyone can make it to Copenhagen but several UCL students will be making the trip (by train or coach, of course!); some to lobby delegates in the conference hall, others to take part in international civil society events, or to demonstrate and take direct action.

Although there has been rather a lot of depressing news on Copenhagen of late, it remains a historic opportunity to galvanise a process which must speedily de-carbonise the world economy; the scientific consensus is that we have until 2015 for emissions to peak. Students from all over the world will be watching events in Copenhagen very closely indeed; we refuse to accept yet more failed solutions which will imperil the future of our generation and the planet as a whole.

Craig Griffiths, UCL Union Environment & Ethics Officer

originally published on the people and planet blog here

This is a blog post I wrote for the climate camp website [now adapted] after an affinity group I was involved in carried out a direct action targetting the treasury on Monday 31st August.

_____________

At 11am today we converged on the Treasury in our cleaning overalls, feather dusters and dishcloths – to clean up the Treasury’s act over their climate change-inducing investments. On this “anti-bank” holiday we dropped a banner highlighting that ‘Climate Change doesn’t take holidays’ – most of the bankers and officials may have had the day off but we were there to press home that time is running out in the fight against climate change.

The government is ignoring its commitments made under the Climate Act by throwing billions in public money at high street banks such as RBS – but doing absolutely nothing to challenge the banks’ investment in environmentally and socially destructive projects such as tar sands  in Canada. Our affinity group thought it was time to do something to remind the government that if its really wants to be a global leader on climate change it must stop these investments and instead give political & financial support to renewable technologies. Its most recent track record on this is appalling; blindly following business interests has resulted in madness such as the closure of the Vestas wind turbine blade factory on the Isle of Wight.

After swooping on the Treasury from St James’ Park we moved onto targets in Whitehall – after learning that apparently the Treasury’s windows fall under the remit of the Royal Parks.  You can look at the ducks all you like in St. James’ Park, but forget freedom of speech; demonstrations and banners are banned (at least according to the police officers on site). The Inland Revenue buildings, the gates of Downing Street and the Department of Energy & Climate Change were all treated to a visit from our cleaners – but we know that unfortunately there’s still a lot of dirt to be washed away in the area.

No arrests were made, indeed one police officer even found the time to discuss our action with a young kid passing by – who after getting one side of the story soon joined in with our spontaneous consensus decision-based meeting on the lawn. It was the first or second action for many activists in our group; we were delighted that it all managed to come together in such a short space of  time. It was also great to move onto direct action after four days of training, sustainable living & movement-building at Climate Camp. There’s much more to come!

____________________________________

Have a look at a vid of our action here, and a BBC website article here

Take part in the Great Climate Swoop on Ratcliffe Coal-fired Power Station on 17th/18th October!

Although it’s difficult to overlook the relative success of the far right and the calamitous results for the centre-left at the recent European elections, environmentalists can perhaps at least console themselves with encouraging green party results in many European countries. Impressive improvements on 2004 in the UK, France & Germany, and now 50 MEPs sitting in the Greens/European Free Alliance fraction in Brussels – well placed to further the debate & legislation on Europe-wide carbon cuts & other crucial environmental measures.

In the UK, the Green Party’s share of the vote increased by more than any other party – to 8.6% – and they came very close to pushing out the BNP in both the Yorkshire & the Humber and the North-West constituencies. Caroline Lucas was resoundingly re-elected with 11.6% in the South-East and Jean Lambert with 10.9% in London. The SNP and Plaid Cymru also sit in The Greens/European Free Alliance fraction in Brussels so the UK has 5 green seats, the same as in 2004.

Die Grünen in Germany achieved one of  their best-ever electoral results, with 12.1% of the vote and 14 MEPs (that’s one more seat than Labour managed in the UK). In Germany’s three city states the Greens polled 23.6 % (Berlin), 22.1% (Bremen) & 20.5% (Hamburg). A special mention goes to the Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg district of Berlin (where I’m currently living!), where the Greens polled a massive 43.2%. The really outstanding Green result of these elections was however in France, where the Europe Écologie party picked up 14 seats, from just 6 last time around, on over 16% of the popular vote. There were also Green gains in the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark & Sweden (unfortunately however in an election dominated by Berlusconi the Italian Greens lost all 5 of their European seats). All this number-crunching aside however, what do these results mean for the Green parliamentary movement in Europe?

The wider environmental movement has never been and must never be overly reliant on its parliamentary wing – think of the vibrancy of climate change campaigning in the UK despite no Green MP – and increased electoral success is not always a positive for the green movement. Represented in the Bundestag since 1983, the German Greens have (perhaps unavoidably) become gradually more moderate ever since, whether in quieting their opposition to nuclear power or agreeing to war in Kosovo (under the then Green Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer). Whereas any form of parliamentary coalition was once seen as unacceptable given the compromises – on policy, practice, and democracy – that it would necessitate, now even coalition with the conserative CDU seems to be becoming an option. Various leading personalities have refused to rule this out – partly because the chances of the German Greens being able to form a majority with the social democrats are looking ever less likely – and Daniel Cohn-Bendit has stated that this must also be an option for green parties in Europe (Cohn-Bendit is co-leader of the Brussels Green fraction and set up Europe Écologie in France – he’s come quite a way from his radical role in the Parisian 1968).

Of course in the UK the situation is vastly different given the electoral first-past-the-post system, under which the Green Party has failed to come anywhere near winning parliamentary seats. Even the system used under the European election disadvantaged the British Greens – with one national list instead of regional lists, nearly 9% of the vote would have translated into 6 or 7 seats, instead of two. Although the direct impact on the environmental movement would be questionable, most would agree that it would be an amazing achievement for Caroline Lucas to become the first Green MP at the next election – which is a definite possibility in the Brighton Pavilion constituency. Until a form of proportional representation is implemented, governing responsibilities will never be a danger to the British Greens, but having even one voice in parliament would make life more uncomfortable for the next undoubtedly “greenwashing” government.

It would certainly be a mistake to overlook the massive political & electoral differences between European Green parties, with the British Greens searching for their first MP and the German Greens looking to head back to government, but these latest electoral results do show a common trend in Green Parties across Europe benefiting from the collapse in the social democratic vote. The German SPD, French PS & British Labour Party each suffered their worst ever European results; it seems that a hoped-for 40% has now turned into 15-20% for the center-left. Its absolutely crucial that the Left and the Greens step up and fill this growing void in European politics, because if they fail to, the (far) Right is waiting in the wings. Green parties must continue to be a progressive alternative to the likes of Berlusconi, Merkel, Cameron & Sarkozy – because the traditional center-left political opponents of these figures are manifestly failing in their task. If the Greens fail to do this, the result will not only be an increased neo-liberal climate-destroying European majority, but more of the likes of Nick Griffin around European parliaments as well.

[originally published on people&planet blog 13.06.09]