Hackergate is not a revolution

Tweet

I've seen a lot of hyped up analysis in The Guardian about Hackergate, calling it a revolution. It goes like this - the crisis at News International is bringing down the Murdoch empire, politicians are losing the fear, the country is changed forever. Like the banking crisis of 2008, and the expenses scandal in Parliament a year later, this is another seismic shock to the British social order. Yeh, right. As my previous post on Public opinion vs People's Power tried to point out, there is a huge difference between a crisis within the establishment, and a revolution. It's quite simple really. The ruling elite - financial, political and media - may be hit by a crisis, such has happened to all three in recent years, but it does not become a revolution unless they are overthrown. And if they are overthrown by an establishment coup, that too does not really count as a revolution. But Britain has not had any of this. All three elements of the ruling elite are firmly in place, despite these crises. In each case, after a lot of hot air, the system closed ranks. Furthermore, the people, who are the only force able to carry out a revolution, have been absent from the scene. And unless the people do more than write angry emails, unless they get organised and take to the streets, as they have done across the Arab world, there can be no revolution. Revolutions do not happen in the pages of newspapers, not even on Facebook. Facebook and other social media can help facilitate revolution, but only action of people and groups from outside the ruling circles can make a revolution. David Cameron has remained calm throughout the News of the World scandal despite the attempts of Labour's Ed Miliband to act as if he is the author of this 'revolution'. Miliband is very far from the revolutionary standard bearer. The entire political class is implicated in the corruption of the political and economic system. The two major parties, and now the Lib Dems, are culpable for overseeing the various crises inflicted on us. The only time Cameron has looked nervous is when the people have spoken, taken to the streets or shown their anger - over student fees, public sector cuts, the NHS and forests. Then he has retreated, or tried to give the impression of retreating.
Each time the people take part in actions to show their anger at the actions of government and their allies in business or the media, then the establishment will get nervous. But it is not in the power of any politician or news organisation to say when that anger will come, and over what issue. Murdoch may fall, but that still leaves all the other news barons to fight over the scraps.
So far it is clear that people care about the things that affect them - like cuts to services, the rights of students to an education and the NHS. There is no reason to believe that Hackergate will be anything different from the other revolutions that did not happen - banking and expenses. The bankers got away with it - we bailed them out. The politicians are still there, apart from the three that were jailed. They say that the British don't do revolutions, and that has largely been the case. And this is no revolution. Come back in a year and see how much our media and politics have changed. That's the only test that matters.