Paternalism or Patronising ?

There has been a big Who-ha about a programme Sarah Ferguson made in which she helps the poor blighted lives of residents on a grim isolated south Manchester Council estate. Now i know this will come as shock to you deers but here at Frapp magazine we actually know the estate in question. Well we once drove through it as fast as possible on the way to a dinner party in Altrincham a few years back. Unfortunately when you actually know the estate in question in these programmes it normally spoils the illusion. Whilst we are not going to deny that areas of the estate are deprive and there are some people living in poverty there, after all a poll in the Manchester Evening News showed that 85% of its readers thought the programme gave an accurate image of the place, the television always polishes it a bit to create the correct image the producers want in the edit. Some examples include one youth who said the whole of south Manchester was shit even though its generally regarded as the best side of the city, it also made it out to be in some kind isolated deserted urban dessert, what it fails to mention is that a 15 min drive either way you find yourself in some of the most affluent areas of the Northwest with uber middle class Hale/Altrincham on one side and the trendy and expensive Manchester suburbs of Didsbury & Chorlton on the other, and that the Northern Moor estate itself is actually quiet small and the residents can and do venture into the bars and restaurants of these better parts of town. Its a bit like when you see Hackney on similar kinds of programmes, yes we all know that there are people there living with crime and poverty, but we also know its full of art students and that the houses near the park sell for 800k. Any-Whoo it seems like the Duchess has cause quiet a stir both with the residents of the estate who say it presented the wrong whole picture of life on the estate, and also some disgruntled (mainly middle class) Mancunians who don't like the idea of an old monied aristocrat making Manchester and the north in general look like one big Chav fest after years of successful regeneration.

On one hand you have to applause Fergie for giving it a try even if there was self promotion in the back of the mind. In her words putting her head above the parapet in order to help those at the bottom of society which lets face it is more than what most members of the Royal Family do. Although Fergie has now made the threat that she might not do it anymore given the backlash she received from angry residents on a recent radio show which does bring into question how committed she was in the first place. Netheraless there was some good out of her actions whether selfish or selfless. However the reason why I think people are becoming sick of such programmes this that it has been the last in the long line of such Paternalist shows. First we had the Secret Millionaire which was based on the uneasy process of normally a self made millionaire going to some god awful area of a northern city or a poor part of London and after a week of gaining a real insight to the plight of the poor hand selected certain organisations, charities and people deserving of their cash. But the programme makers got round this by showing the teary affect the experience had on the millionaire, the heart warming response of those given the cash and ultimately the good that in the end came from the cash injection. After this the same production company, who must be making a killing of such programmes, came up with a more watered down version 'How the Other half Lives' this had no selection process in it, expect of course that of the programme makers, and two random families from extreme spectrum's of wealth and class were brought together to see what they could learn from each other and what financial help the rich family could give (if wanted) to improve and in some cases save that of the poor's. The upward side of this is that at least the wealthy are prepared to have connect with the poor and if they so choose provide help by sharing their good fortune. The downside view of this old fashioned Victorian paternalism is the one of Judge, the sense that the wealthy are being given an opportunity to judge the poor and then decide whether they want to help or not, after all it is the wealthy who occupy the position of power in such situations. It also always amazing that so many of the Millionaires suddenly start popping up on numerous TV shows after the class experiment has finished where as the poor are never to be seen again.

What I think really annoys people is that in the 21st Century we are still relying on this essentially Victorian way of paternalism and this shouldn't be the case. However grateful a poor community maybe for the money of a secret millionaire or like in the case of the Duchess the help in setting up community based groups to turn things around and using their high profiles to give focus to the needs of poorer communities, the point is that in this day of age the poor shouldn't still be reliant on such paternalism and indeed at the mercy of such paternalism. Instead through all of the political developments over the last 100 years we should be in the situation where by the poor have there own power to help themselves or at the very least mechanisms of the state should mean that they are not reliant on the selective lottery of paternalist handouts.