Part 1
Casualties of 'Casualty'
Last year the television programme 'Casualty' celebrated 30
years on screen and its writer gave celebratory interviews admitting that it
had been created as propaganda on behalf of the NHS at a time when popular and
political support for restoration of a system free from State control was
rising, and it appeared possible to dismantle the socialist 'post-War
settlement' in its entirety. There had been several earlier programmes, both
British and imported, with health care settings, but 'Casualty' was never just
going to be about tales of hospital life, it was always intended to have a
political edge to it, defending the system and calling for increased funding
for it. It is entirely typical of the BBC as a large, publicly funded State
body, to broadcast on behalf of other large, publicly funded State bodies; it
is institutionally statist because only people who support institutions of its
type would work for one.
NHS socialised
medicine
Of course, 'Casualty' was far from being alone in acting to
rally support for the NHS; socialised medicine is a subject which illustrates
perfectly the ability of the media taken together to form a narrowing aperture
through which the world must be viewed. Some options are within the scope of
vision, others are not merely unacceptable but invisible. When it comes to the
NHS, the arguments against it have been entirely excluded from public discourse
and the alternatives have been left undiscussed. The public has been given to
understand that the alternative to the NHS is people dropping dead in the
streets, and politicians have been given to understand that public worship of
the system is such that to question its virtues would be a career-ending act of
folly. The result of this stereopticon effect, to borrow Weaver's word, is, as
we all know, that the NHS has become firmly entrenched, and abolition is almost
literally unthinkable – it is never mentioned so the thought of it never occurs
to most people. We are trapped.
The truth concerning the NHS is that it is a poisonously
destructive system radically incompatible with the principles of Christian
civilisation; it is implicitly condemned by the teaching of the Church, and
should not receive the support of any Catholic. It made our country what it is
today – drunken, dissolute, godless, promiscuous, and too beaten down and
brainwashed to do anything about it – and its abolition is the sine qua non for
the moral, social, psychological and spiritual regeneration of the nation.
The condition of our country is essentially due to a
collective failure to develop to psychological maturity; there are no adults
around, only grown-up children. It is simply impossible to build or maintain a
society that is decent, moral and stable with one hand whilst using the other
to tear up personal, family and social responsibility by the roots; and that is
precisely what socialised medicine does. It infantilises people, reducing them
to a dependency that stunts the growth of the moral faculties as the scope for
the exercise of virtue is radically reduced in favour of a subhuman
functionality. The Tablet's editor, Douglas Woodruff, saw a clear analogy
between Britain under the NHS and a life of slavery as he condemned the
replacement of 'the tradition of effective voluntary co-operation' “by the
compulsory orders of a highly organised and paternal state, determined to see that
all the hands on the plantation are humanely cared for, so that they may be
able to do their work”.
The dire condition of our country can be remedied only by a
reconstruction having due regard to the cause of the damage in the light of
Church teaching i.e. we must tear down the structures of sin and build anew
from first principles. To begin with, we must reject socialism absolutely and
unequivocally; the Church condemns it as incompatible with Christianity because
it is materialistic in its philosophy and inhuman in practice (cf. Quadragesima
Anno 111ff.). The materialism of socialist institutions is fundamentally
opposed to the theological virtues of faith, hope and charity; they propose
always a technological solution to every social question, marginalising
religious institutions and attempting to limit their activity solely to
worship. The attempt to replace charity with a bureaucratic framework of rights
and entitlements amounts to an attempt to exclude the God Who is love from
public life, and to strip away the intermediate institutions that should stand
between people and the State. “Whoever
wants to eliminate love is preparing to eliminate the human as such” (Deus
Caritas Est 28). “In the end, the claim that just social structures would make
works of charity superfluous masks a materialist conception of man: the
mistaken notion that man can live “by bread alone” (Matthew IV 4, cf.
Deuteronomy VIII 3) – a conviction that demeans man and ultimately disregards
all that is specifically human” (ibid.). The specifically human consists
precisely in our relationship to and with the Creator in Whose image we are
made and the socialist institutions fracture that relationship, leaving people
unable to conceive of faith and hope in anything other than intellectual terms
rather than in terms of confident trust in a divine providence which they
receive daily.
Socialists hate the
divine deeply and instinctively
Furthermore, the human life is one that is ordinarily lived
in community, and lived through a variety of institutional communities; the
first of which, in the order of nature, is of course the family into which the
individual is born (cf. Summa II-IIae.10). It is the invariable practice of
socialism to attack these communities because it is fundamentally opposed to
the bond of love underlying them and binding them together; the social
responsibility expressed in charitable action is a participation in the divine,
and the socialists hate the divine deeply and instinctively because in their
hearts they know that their materialist beliefs are empty and meaningless, they
cannot withstand the light of truth, so they fly from the face of God Who is
the very truth. The socialists have always intended to destroy all true
communities, and to leave the individual naked and defenceless before the
State, wholly dependent and utterly servile. The Fabian socialists in power
after the War pledged themselves to achieve by democracy and bureaucracy, step
by step, all the effects of a revolution; their Government was led by the man
who had sent the Brigada Clement Attlee to do battle in his name as part of the
Red horde fighting for a Spanish Republic whose persecution of the Church
mirrored the imperial Rome of Nero, Diocletian or Severus in its atrocities.
The totalitarian 'cradle to grave' claims of the socialist
State begin at birth when the NHS claims the child for the Government, issuing
him or her with a number, and demanding rights of access in cases where a child
has been born outside one of its facilities. The mother will, incidentally,
receive stern advice to use birth control in future. Even in the case of a
healthy child there is a good deal of fussing about and creating unnecessary
records by way of an assertion of ownership and responsibility on the part of
the State. Where there is any weakness
in a marriage this assumption of responsibility by the State will very often
allow a couple to feel that they may part without difficulty, and without harm
to the child. Such weaknesses are, in any case, made more common by the
psychological immaturity induced by socialism as the adolescent mindset does
not encompass permanence, stability or commitment.
Under the NHS the
decision as to whether an unhealthy child is treated - is made and imposed upon
the family. Re Charlie Gard, Ashya King and Charlotte Wyatt.
Where the child is unhealthy, the claim of the State is more
explicit. A socialised system is always a utilitarian system in which
efficiency and value for money are everything and the State employee takes
precedence over the member of the public. The individual is made in the image
of God and is, therefore, of infinite worth as an end in him or herself, and
should never be treated as having a merely instrumental value. From this it
follows that the care of the sick must be a work infused with supernatural
charity, undertaken for the love of God seen in His created image, and ideally
performed by religious or those under their direction. Under the NHS the
decision as to whether an unhealthy child is treated and what treatment he or
she might receive, is made by those employed within the system and imposed upon
the family; if they dissent from the decision, legal action may be taken to
remove parental responsibility and prevent the family's removing the child to a
private, charitable hospital or from leaving the jurisdiction of the British
courts. Most such cases do not reach the courts, and those that do are
generally subject to reporting restrictions, so we only know a handful of names
such as those of Charlie Gard, Ashya King and Charlotte Wyatt.
Later in childhood the claim of the State over and against
the parental responsibility derived from natural law is maintained through the
legal fiction that the rights of the child are opposed to those of their
parents. This notion is invariably applied to promote an anti-life agenda as
the NHS works in partnership with State schools to subvert the morality of
youth, giving explicit sexual instruction where parents have opted not to have
it imparted by teachers, distributing or arranging various forms of artificial
birth control and taking girls for lunchtime abortions. The Gillick
(contraception) and Axon (abortion) legal cases established that parents need
not be informed. In recent years the number of girls under the age of 16 placed
on long-term contraception has been increased to seven or eight thousand a year
as they often fail to take the daily pill.
A contraceptive
society is an exploitative and a violent society.
It must be noted that young people in this country
are invariably found to be amongst the least happy or most miserable in the
world, and that three causes have been identified for it. They are early
sexualisation, substantial use of social media and the disintegration of civil
society due to the welfare state (i.e. the NHS, pensions and benefits systems
combined); the most recent OECD report is particularly insistent on this third
cause and the passivity of civil institutions and social networks in this
country. The deliberate fostering of a contraceptive mentality exacerbates the
social disintegration initiated by the creation of the socialist institutions.
The contraceptive mentality is one that views others in instrumental terms;
they are seen not even simply as a means to an end, but as a means of
self-gratification. This attitude extends beyond the sexual to all areas of
life; and is, incidentally, promoted in many ways by broadcast media which
appear to present others to us for our pleasure at our own convenience. A
contraceptive society is an exploitative and a violent society.
By Prayer Crusader St Philip Howard