+I’ve just read Simon Kuper’s book Chums: How a Tiny Caste of Oxford Tories Took Over the UK (Profile Books, 2023) which describes how many of our ‘leaders’ used their connections and charmed lives to sail through Oxford University and go on to their undeserved privileged places in our exalted constitution. It seems study and hard work were low down on their undergraduate lists of priorities. Kuper suggests that things have improved since the 1970s and 80s but I wonder. A story in the Daily Mail on 28th December, telling how Alastair Campbell’s son Rory has allegedly lost a pile (millions) of dosh in some betting syndicate he ran contains this juicy quote ‘In a 2018 interview Rory, who read Politics, Philosophy and Economics at Oxford, said he spent 'the majority of time' at university 'playing poker and watching football'. Perhaps we should take a closer look at all those who did PPE—it appears that it may be overrated. Clearly the main lesson learnt was that time spent at this university set you up regardless of talent.
+Co-incidentally, another book I’ve been reading kind of takes up this theme: How Westminster Works . . And Why it Doesn’t, by Ian Dunt (Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 2023). Here we learn about a dysfunctional system of governance which bakes in the amateurism which makes our rulers believe they can just ‘wing it’ through any challenge. Generally speaking, the underpinning philosophy is called ‘generalism,’ which is to say our top people are Jacks (and Jills) of all trades, capable of transitioning to any new job given to them. One example of this that comes to mind is the Secretary of State for Many Hats John Reid, who was placed at the top of more departments for about six months each I can’t remember how many. That he held so many positions however may suggest that Tony Blair had little confidence in anybody else (they may have been Brownites). Dunt’s book I think very accurately describes the ramshackle parliamentary culture which is maintained in Westminster, which of course suits the government of the day down to the ground. For most of the time the Commons bows to the executive, and as Dunt suggests this suits MPs admirably, since it saves them a lot of time having to think too deeply (or at all) about what they’re voting on. But as I discovered not so long ago, even the most inconsequential aspects of the Commons are rigorously controlled by the government, in this case whether or not the longest serving woman MP could take on the lead duties traditionally performed by the ’Father of the House’ as opposed to the ’Mother of the House.’ (At the time of my enquiry into that, the powers that be may have been worried that Diane Abbott could upset their applecart.) As we marvel at the muddling through nature of our politics we can rest assured that our democracy delivers all that we ask of it. . ‘cos that’s the default position. +Jimmy Carter, the former US President’s death at age 100 will bring on a brief flurry of rosy tinted tributes. But it is as well to remember that Carter was in the same mould as most US presidents and a corrective to the gush is needed—without taking away from his later humanitarian work. Perhaps his greatest failing was opening the door to Reagan and the intensification of the Cold War (which only ended with the arrival of Gorbachev).. Here’s an example of what happened in his halcyon days: “Highly classified for years, PD 59 was signed [by Carter] during a period of heightened Cold War tensions owing to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, greater instability in the Middle East, and earlier strains over China policy, human rights, the Horn of Africa, and Euromissiles. In this context, the press coverage quickly generated controversy by raising apprehensions that alleged changes in U.S. strategy might lower the threshold of a decision by either side to go nuclear, which could inject dangerous uncertainty into the already fragile strategic balance. The press coverage elicited debate inside and outside the government, with some arguing that the PD would aggravate Cold War tensions by increasing Soviet fears about vulnerability and raising pressures for launch-on-warning in a crisis. Adding to the confusion was the fact that astonishingly, even senior government officials who had concerns about the directive did not have access to it.” So lowering the threshold for nuclear war was not a Reagan invention. And at the same time that Carter oversaw a peace deal between Egypt and Israel we might ask what happened to massive US military support for the latter, which persists to this day with consequences seen over decades?
0 Comments
An article in Philosophy Now purporting to be a rational, i.e. non-empirical argument for the existence of God rattled my cage. ’A Critique of Pure Atheism’ by Andrew Likoudis sought to make a virtue out of God’s ineffability. In which case of course the mere use of words presents us with an oxymoronic abuse of language. I doubt my letter to the editor will be published, so for the record here is my dip into the private language of faith:
Methinks Andrew Likoudis is just playing a language game. What exactly does "Since God is not only pure intellect but the ground of being itself (which cannot be quantitatively analyzed of course) . . . seeking material scientific proof does a disservice to the discussion of God's existence" actually mean? In saying this not only does Likoudis diss the best part of the Bible (and the God that goes with it) but also reveals that he is talking in his own private language, not least one in which the conclusion precedes the premises. Personally I believe that what I call The Giant Cauliflower 'is not only pure intellect but is the ground of being itself.' I urge Likoudis to prove me wrong. By the way, my Giant Cauliflower is just what I choose to call it and it is beyond scientific discovery. There’s no doubt that the Prime Minister is on his way out. The trouble is, which one? Starmer? Trudeau? The latest person chosen by Macron? Olaf Scholz (technically a Chancellor)? 2025 could be a more consequential year than 2024 as we see the embers of ‘social democracy’ trodden all over. Trudeau’s days are certainly over, I don’t think he has any rabbits left in his hat and his begging trip to Mar-a-Lago didn’t play well; Macron’s latest nominee has less chance of survival than Marat in his bath; Scholz has been found out—a pretender to middle management totally out of his depth. Technically only Starmer has the ramparts of a large parliamentary majority to protect him from this prime ministerial slaughter, but he has demonstrated a determination for self-immolation which can be the only explanation for his being out of the country so often. Never was one so lacking in international statesmanship in need of it. Next year it looks like the triumphant ones will be Trump and Putin, but hey! There’s a few days to go!
Next up: who will be the next Archbishop(s) of the Anglican Church? Let he who is without sin cast the first sermon . . Starmer has announced a crop of new peers, and I bet all of them have been asked prior to their elevation to vote for their extinction in line with The Beloved Leader’s steadfast, unshakeable and total commitment to getting rid of the unelected chamber. Of course they have. There’s a few names I’m familiar with—Julie Elliot was MP for Sunderland Central but was also an old regional Labour Party colleague of mine (and David Evans, Labour Party general secretary who’ll be happy with his unelected position); Sue Gray we know about—as the woman who was selected to be tossed overboard by her disloyal master; Phil Wilson, former MP for Sedgefield, 100% loyal (as indeed they all are); Mike Katz of the so-called Jewish Labour Movement and Luciana Berger, former organiser of Labour Friends of Israel head up the Zionist clique (along with former LFI Chair and MP Steve McCabe). Sundry others, some of them perhaps deserving of a gong (ex-TUC general secretary Brendan Barber for example) got on the list. But for every one of them there’ll be 10 others who are now ruefully thinking where’s my ermine? Only 10?
Perhaps unsurprisingly Mandy has been appointed our ambassador to the United States. This certainly says something about the ‘Snake' (LWT) the 'Crab' (Prescott) and the 'Yuk’s' (everybody) capacity for worming his way around the establishment but also reflects on Starmer’s lack of judgement. Where Mandy goes, trouble follows. At a deeper level (in this rather shallow swimming pool) we can achingly see Starmer’s inability to shift gear away from the nostrums of New Labour (to mix metaphors). Where new thinking is required, we’re going to have a very slightly polished but ultimately dim reflection of our delusional ‘special relationship’ hawked round Washington. How long should we wait before we see Mandy’s remarkable political attennae bringing us a ‘great’ free trade deal and a common sense relationship with the Imbecile in the White House? Trump will be wondering why his chum Fartage wasn’t chosen. And Nige will make political capital out of his rejection even though he was never in the running—merely proving once again to his followers' delight that he is an insurgent against the establishment. Somehow the Musk money will flow more freely to Reform UK Ltd. If Musk has any sense it’ll flow before the law tightens up although there’s no guarantee that will happen.
Meanwhile the government’s war on pensioners continues and the water companies have been given the green light to rack up prices well beyond inflation (which itself has risen again). Has this government got a death wish? We're all being mugged - in more ways than one. +It’s been widely reported that more black Americans voted for Trump (or Republican) than ever before, or at least for 50 years. It rather begs the question whether his popular vote would have been bigger had not State Republican parties done so much gerrymandering to try to stop black voters casting their ballots. Perhaps the gerrymanderers will think twice next time round. But here in Blighty Tory attempts to stop the wrong type of people voting, e.g. by introducing voter i/d could still be beneficial to their cause—it might dampen the turnout for Reform, never mind the Labour Party whose fortunes seem to be heading for a psephological nose-dive without outside assistance.
+Labour’s devolution crusade is in full swing, with centralised plans for housing development announced, the abolition of district councils in favour of larger unitary authorities and more executive mayors. When parties talk of power to the people they rarely mean it—with perhaps the big exceptions of e.g. the Scottish parliament and Welsh Assembly, etc. National leaders always feel a bit powerless to get their agenda through, so talk of devolution is often just talk. And with the current crop of executive mayors all bar one being Labour, the party has issued instructions about their performance—and ultimately their ability to be reselected. Performance means obedience in this context, remembering the Party’s disgraceful treatment of Jamie Driscoll, former mayor of North Tyneside who had an admirable record of delivery for his constituents but was disbarred from standing again apparently because of the heinous offence of sharing a platform with Ken Loach. In Labour (and Tory) terms devolution means do as we say—at the local level. Local ‘government’ is a misnomer. This wasn’t always the case. Much of our Victorian infrastructure is a legacy of local councils tackling the problems that arose from the rapid urbanisation that took place then. But all those things—water, power, education, even telephones—were stripped from them. +Just back from a little trip to The Hague and Amsterdam, happily surviving a rough North Sea on the ferry from Newcastle. It would have been quicker to go from Hull, but in line with the ex-Transport Secretary’s advice I am continuing to boycott P&O. I hope DFDS treat their workers with greater respect. I wonder if on my next trip to The Hague Netanyahu will also be paying a visit. And if he does, and is convicted of war crimes as he should be, where will he serve his sentence? There always seems to be space available in HMP Belmarsh. Never one to miss an opportunity Israel has been bombing Damascus. I wonder if this will encourage friendly relations between the ‘new’ Syria and Israel?
+In a comment tuned into the nineteenth century U.S. doctrine of Manifest Destiny, which sought the continual territorial expansion of the U.S., Trump has expressed the view that Canada could become the 51st state. Somebody should tell him that the U.K. already has some claim to that title. Trump if challenged over his (repeated online) remarks will no doubt dismiss them as just a joke. He’s been here before with his suggestion that the U.S. should buy Greenland. I wonder if Trump can spell ‘sovereignty.’ Canadians may be a bit worried that Prime Minister Trudeau rushed down to Mar-a-Lago to meet the imbecile, although I imagine this had more to do with Trump’s tariff proposals than this other nonsense. Whatever. Even now one Canadian might be preening himself to become Trump’s imperial overlord of the new ‘51st state.’ I refer of course to the convicted criminal Conrad Black, whose delusional ambitions I doubt are blunted in any way by his decrepitude. I am only joking. In a piece on the BBC News tonight we heard how the French government is likely to collapse in a couple of days’ time. Judging by the report, and an interview with a conservative commentator, this is all because Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National (or whatever they call themselves these days) is unhappy with the government’s budget. But Prime Minister Michel Barnier has pushed it through without a vote, which means there will now have to be a confidence motion in the government. Because no-one supports Le Pen and her neo-fascists, the no-confidence motion will come from the Left and Le Pen can support it or not. But there was no time in the report given to the views of the Left, or what its leader may or may not do. It was almost as if they didn’t exist, despite them having more MPs than any other party. Perhaps post-Corbyn the BBC believes the left has ceased to exist anywhere and that becomes a fait accompli, sort of thing.
Some rather pathetic arguments are being developed to counter the growing demand for the legalisation of assisted dying. One of these is that it’s going to cost the NHS a packet to administer (in every sense of the word). Health Secretary and man of faith Wes Streeting has apparently ordered civil servants to weigh up the costs. Now, all-round loyalist media performer Pat McFadden has suggested that patients who want to take the route of assisted dying may have to pay for the privilege. Why, he asks, shouldn’t this be considered when people are prepared to go to Switzerland to die (where it costs £15,000 apparently)? Despite his Catholic upbringing, McFadden actually voted for the second reading of the bill, so perhaps his comments now are suggestive of how some MPs voted ‘aye’ perhaps with the intent of sabotaging it later. To suggest that paying for assisted dying could be contemplated in the NHS begs the question ‘what other NHS services could be charged for?’ The NHS already spends an awful lot of money helping people to die (but it’s done discreetly). Going down the open assisted dying route is more likely to save the NHS money than otherwise. I might just add that doctors, i.e. GPs already charge for a wide range of services relating to their patients, as anybody who has sought a health power of attorney for a relative will know.
|
Archives
December 2024
|