Are the aims of austerity the same as Churchill’s?

editorial image
Have your say

From reading the recent letters to the Star regarding the reputation of Winston Churchill during World War II, one gets the impression that the authors are by and large living in some illusory Heartbeat type of Golden Age.

For example, a veteran of World War I, JB Priestley, used his slot on BBC radio early on in the war to ask what the aims of WW2 were.

Was it once again to be a war for princes at the expense of the common man whereby the country collectively bore any burden in order to defeat Nazism, only to then go back to where we started from the day before war was declared?

Churchill’s expressed desire. Or was it an opportunity to radically reform society?

For he reckoned that most in the UK were not fighting to restore the past given that it was such a past that had brought the country to this heavy hour in the first place, but were fighting to rid the UK and the world of the Nazi encumbrance so that a nobler plan for the future could be created for our species.

A plan in which the ordinary man was entitled to a say in creating once peace was won.

This intention was expressed on the part of many in the 1945 election, with Churchill booed on the hustings and unceremoniously abandoned with a new UK order put in place that was eventually crucified on the alter of trade union militancy, thereby paving the way for Thatcherism and austerity.

This leads one to ask: what are the aims of modern austerity, the same as Churchill’s were?

Michael Parker

Robertshaw Crescent, Deepcar, S36