OPINION: Cameron and Hague's "Them and Us" politics is bad for everyone

The emergency talks about new treaties and potential re-organisation of Europe has really highlighted the "Them and Us" politics of David Cameron, William Hague and the rest of their Little Englander Tories.

At the time of the 2010 General Election and all the "I agree with Nick" nonsense, there was talk of, and hope for, a new politics. A politics of consensus, co-operation, of mutual benefit and of a brighter and better future for all.

Yes, I accept that was all election claptrap and, along with various other "promises" that all the parties made which they had no intention of fulfilling. I very much doubt that Cameron had any idea that having "agreed with Nick" he'd end up sharing a cabinet table with Clegg and a bunch of his Lib Dem mates (certainly not while Clegg was still a Lib Dem anyhow!).

But Cameron and Hague, and just about every British Member of Parliament in the history of Westminster, are all masters of "Them and Us" politics - it's what they do best: Divide and rule. Whether it's rich against poor, town against country, pro-nuclear against anti-nuclear, left against right, our politicians have always exaggerated difference of opinion to divide society instead of using a difference of opinion, sharing common ground and developing a consensus that is to everyone's mutual benefit.

Such "gang politics" are why our current system doesn't work properly. We elect our MPs, more often than not, by the colour of their rosette and not by their intellect, abilities or experience. In the UK we have, to all intents and purposes, a kakistocracy; agivernment of the least well qualified, because they are passionate about their gang and will always work to benefit that gang, and, therefore, disadvantage those not in the gang.

Over the past few days, it has become apparent that Cameron and Hague are now exporting their "Them and Us" politics to Europe on a stronger, more petulant way than ever before.

Yes, of course the Tories have always had a "Them and Us" approach to Europe, and it's served them well, dragging along with it large numbers of vile racists and xenophobes. Thatcher, whilst signing the Maastricht Treaty that welcomed greater European integration, continued to play the rabid bulldog for the domestic market because she knew that, not far below the surface of so many of our poorly educated masses, lies a rampant racist - someone who sees the term "Churchillian" as a positive rather than a description of a tragic and dangerous buffoon.

The issue of Europe could well tear the Tories apart again, much in the way it destroyed John Major's premiership in the early 1990s, but, today, the main beneficiaries wouldn't be Labour, or even theLib Dems. The danger is that likes of the far right would gain strongholds at Westminster and as the nation's representatives at the European Parliament. Can any person with a fully-functioning brain really want the racists and xenophobes of the BNP, UKIP and the EDL representing the UK in Europe? Do they really want the UK internationally isolated in the way heir diatribe suggests? They seem to forget that the world has changed, Britain no longer has an empire and people are no longer judged by the colour of their skin.

So, what do Cameron and Hague hope to achieve by ripping apart Europe? A few extra votes at home, maybe? Stop a few of their supporters drifting to UKIP and the BNP? Maybe even prevent some of their backbench MPs switching to other parties? Or simply some back-slapping congratulations from right-wing extremists?

The UK needs to look carefully at how well served they are by the "Them and Us" society. Do we really want to be divided so clumsily? Is it because we hope that we'll be in the lucky "Us" group? Is it simply down to greed, selfishness and racism?

Sadly, I think it is; too many Britons vote for themselves personally and don't look at the bigger picture that might, and probably would, benefit not only everyone more but, consequently, them too.

"Them and Us" politics is no different from West Side Story's Jets and Sharks. In the end, no one benefits and there are tragic casualties on the journey.

In reality, there is no "Them and Us" - there's only "Us". We need to work for the common good. We are the human race and we need to cooperate to achieve goals of mutual benefit.

It's time for a change.

The Eurozone Debt Crisis Explained

Source: Payplan – IVA and free debt advice provider

OPINION: Eurozone Crisis - my solution

I guess I'd best come clean... I'm not an economist! I think my bank manager would go into shock at the idea of me offering financial advice to anyone else, let alone a complete continent!

Today, yet again, we have a crisis meeting of governments in Brussels to try to sort out the latest hiatus in debt. This time it's not only Greece but also Italy that are cussing concerns.

How many times will this happen before Europe's governments accept that something more substantial needs to be done? How much more tinkering will we have without actually coming up with a proper solution?

Surely we need a cure, not just a band aid?

There are very few countries, if any, that aren't in debt to some extent. The situation is a nonsense. The fear is that today's "comprehensive solution" will only solve things for a few weeks, maybe into the new year.

I have a radical solution I'd like to suggest. It requires governments to take back control of international finances and put banks back into a support role.

My solution:

* All repayments need to be suspended. Stopped would be a better word.

* No more interest should be charged.

* Countries have what they have.

We then look at the matter internationally. Let's stop the nonsense of the Little Englanders (and probably Kleine Deutschen and Peu le Français) who only see national interest. That is the politics of the past. It is no longer 1939!

I'd also outlaw inflation - I've never seen the point or value of it. Things are worth what they are. Is there any benefit to inflation?

Nations should then be given 12 months to devise a truly international, co-operative fiscal policy. An international economic policy that works for everyone's interest, that will mean that we don't get in this mess again.

It might be that, alongside the international fiscal policy, we do have a single-currency - I see that as a label and not essential to begin with - but we agree that x number of pounds is worth x number of dollars is worth x number of Euros, etc. We outlaw currency trading and exchanges that drive up and down currencies.

I expect this would require the immediate nationalisation (internationalisation?) of all banks.

Ideally, this would be a global agreement - all countries involved.

Third World Debt would be cancelled - so many problems in the Third World are caused by interest repayments - and there would be funds transferred from wealthier nations to less worthy on a per capita basis.

If I were President of the World, a position I'm happy to accept we're it to be offered, I'd take this further. I would also suspend all business debt repayments and all personal debt repayments - and cancel them.

Let's start again - wipe the slate clean.

Money is a notional thing. It is worth whatever we say it's worth. Debt is, similarly, a concept that can cause hardship and chaos and, therefore, needs to be eliminated.

It's an extreme solution and, sadly, there are too many idiots, xenophobic and greedy interests involved in finding a solution that will result in this whole mess rumbling on for months, years, decades.

Let's start again. Let's think differently.