equals four

Yesterday I really wanted to write something on the Guardian piece about David Cameron’s plan of “modernising of the Conservative party today by embracing a radical new agenda of ‘promoting wellbeing’”. How? “He will argue that employers, through family-friendly workplace practices, can fulfil a moral duty to help staff achieve that sense of wellbeing. His remarks have been constructed to contrast with a vision of regulation and the Protestant work ethic exemplified by Gordon Brown”.

I couldn’t articulate what was wrong with this, until after I shut down my computer and went for a walk. And then thought of this week’s design of the week, and put two and two together:

Which says “noblesse”, written in Hebrew. Ah yes, the problem is noblesse oblige - the concept that the powerful have the moral responsibility to help the weak. What’s wrong with this? (In my view?) That it makes exploitation (for example) something that is not forbidden because it is never allowed, but out of the kindness of the powerful. And that whole employers should care about employee “wellbeing”? Of course, yes, because laws should prevent exploitation, and because employers should value not losing their workers. But not so that employers can congratulate themselves on the pretension that they are satisfying a “deep human need”.

OK, enough from me. For articles talking about Germans: (they swim naked!), (they’re funny, we just can’t understand them!) and a bunch more in preparation for travellers to/television viewers of the world cup.