A politician of astonishing wealth, Rishi Sunak is now, “the richest resident in 10 Downing Street's history, with him and his wife having a combined wealth that even outranks the monarch.” But there is equality of opportunity as was so subversively described in the immortal words of Anatole France:
In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.
Notwithstanding the historical injustices the rich have inflicted on humankind to achieve and maintain their wealth, the voting public of which only a fraction are millionaires keep placing these type of people in office. Even a dullard has to know that there are capable people who are not wealthy but who would conduct their political lives with the disadvantaged to the forefront of their minds. Is there anybody but an Eton toff to disabuse us of the idea that Mick Lynch would run the UK with much more compassion, empathy and social conscience than Sunak? Even without switching from capitalism to socialism, the voter can at least refuse to tick the ballot paper beside the name of any millionaire.
We cannot feign surprise that the British Tories will install those who value personal enrichment over wealth redistribution. In the mind of the Tory, poverty is not a trap but a stepping stone. Funny how keeping wages down incentivises the average citizen to be more industrious but works the other way round with politicians, bankers and judges. What still bemuses is that wealth seems viewed as a sign of success and as such merits reward, when arguably it reflects advantage that caused so much disadvantage in order to scratch and gouge its way to the top. The success of the wealthy few is secured by ensuring a lack of success for so many others. Take note of what will never appear in a Tory manifesto
All income and wealth is generated by social co-operation and is therefore the property of society, not the property of those who claim to have “earned” it or, worse, inherited it.
Rishi Sunak is already talking about a severe economic crisis yet fails to explain that his own presence in the engine room helped steer the UK economy onto the rocks. In making the break with then British Prime Minister David Cameron (how many PMs back is that?) he fanned the Brexit flames describing the opportunity as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity for our country to take back control of its destiny.” His party led by a coalition of buffoons and bastards ever since, has eviscerated what little stability the poorest had in their lives. The UK, long the host of big banks, has now acquired a reputation for food banks.
With the appointment of the mediocre but malevolent Suella Braverman to Home Secretary, Sunak is indicating how he will tackle the economic problem: more resources to the prisons and less to the poor. Priti Patel didn't get that slot in case she might deport him.
As for the opposition, a less wealthy millionaire than Sunak, Sir Keir Starmer - an establishment knight far removed from the radicalism of the disestablished Sir Roger Casement - is seething that the British public was not offered the opportunity of a general election.
Starmer senses that the public is aghast at the one act circus the UK government has become - all clowns and no trapeze artists - and will vote for Labour only against the shambles rather than for Labour policies per se. His fear is that by the time the election comes around the public will have seen enough of Sunak, to not see enough distance between him and Starmer. Then Sir Keir of the establishment will be found out and the public might stick with the Tory it knows rather than the Tory it doesn’t. At least, if he loses, nobody with a straight face can say Poor Keir.