Isolation and individualism

Those who express concern about the individualism and isolation that pervades our societies can often seem somewhat fanatical, especially when they link these trends to capitalism and to consumerism, or suggest that elites in our societies have an interest in furthering this process. Now and again, however, some branch of government will come up with an idea or an initiative so obviously likely to have detrimental effects on our society (if one views isolation an individualism as detrimental) that other explanations seem inadequate.
I've just got home from a conference on the history of the Soviet Union, and one of the speakers noted that "we can accuse Soviet leaders of a great many crimes over the 74 years they were in power, but naivete is not one of them." A sensible point, but one which applies equally to this country, I think. All of these initiatives cost money and use up resources, and no matter how hare-brained they might appear to those of us whose role is merely to observe the country being goverened and not to take part in it (an indication that the "democracy" and indeed the "freedom" we treasure is really only nominal; it is not functional) it is nonetheless very rare that anything happens for no reason.
What then, to make of news that police in Northamptonshire are implementing a "card" system to deal with teenagers who they fear might engage in "anti-social behaviour"? Apologies, but the only news report I can find of this story is on a BBC childrens' news website, and so is rather brief and superficial. It reports that yellow "warning cards" will be given "to kids who are hanging around in large groups but haven't broken the law" while red cards will be issued to those who do break the law, and a letter will be sent to their parents. "The scheme is aimed at getting kids to realise that hanging around in groups can make some people feel scared and threatened."
And here is the crux of it, "hanging around in groups" is what is being discouraged by the police, even though, given the fact that there is no law against it (yet) it is in fact outside of their jurisdiction. Now let us consider the effect of issuing yellow cards to a group of kids who are "hanging around in a group." It is the clear intention that issuing the yellow card has some effect - otherwise they would not be bothering with it in the first place. There are only two likely effects in fact: the first (less likely, I think) is that the group of kids moves or dissipates, thus becoming less "threatening". The second (far more likely, I think) is that issuing a yellow card will provoke illegal behaviour, allowing the police to issue a red card, an anti-social behaviour order or other measures, depending on the nature of the offence they manage to provoke. What is clear is that the police are engaged in actively discouraging legal behaviour - free assembly, in effect.
It is certainly the case that anti-social behaviour - including legal behaviour - can be a major nuisance to people, and that many (especially the elderly) may fear for their safety in the presence of rowdy youths. The problem obviously needs to be addressed. But not by the police.
It is time for the people of this country to radically re-evaluate the role of authority in our society, and recognise that freedom - that which seperates us from our polar opposite, our "other," our intractable foe, the eternally backward nations it is our historical (Messianic?) role to "liberate" from their own undemocratic, unchanging traditions, if our leaders are to be believed - is under direct threat. It is time for the people of this country to demand that authority exists only where it can justify itself. It is time to engage in this assessment directly, rather than leaving it to those representatives we trust to govern our affairs.
In my opinion, there is plainly no defence for the police forces actively and systematically discouraging behaviour which our facade-democracy has not decided is beyond the boundaries of the law.
Not only this, but it is time to examine precisely what is at work here. The disengagement of ordinary people from questions of the legitimacy of authority and other questions of how our affairs should be run is increasing all the time, and it is aided by our isolation from one another, by our individualism. The more isolated we become, the harder it is to engage with others in discussions about what is happening and the meaning of "politics" and political decisions. This process strengthens the power of unaccountable authority in society by decreasing the degree to which it is subject to close scrutiny. And as the power of unaccountable authority accumulates, the more it can serve to increase our isolation. The process can continue until we have lost our freedom, lost our democratic rights, without really realising that it has happened, and certainly not realising HOW it has happened, making it harder, in turn, to win freedoms back, to curb the power of unaccountable (or, by popular perception, illegitimate) authority.
I think it is of the highest significance that this story is deemed to be of interest only to children, and not to the rest of us, therefore reported nowhere in the media but by a childrens news programme. This should serve in itself as an indication that our democracy is not functioning as it should - as most people would wish it to - and that radical action is necessary if we want to live in a democratic society. We must act now, before radical action itself becomes an impossibility.