Andrew Sullivan has an absolutely barnstormer of a piece here about the British elections. It is often highly refreshing to read a perspective on the poll by a Brit living thousands of miles away after having spent the past two decades earning a living outside the UK. His analysis of what is wrong with the Tories, his brilliant skewering of our media, and his rendering of the LibDems and Labour, is spot on.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
26 comments to Sullivan hits the mark |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Too bloody right. Print it out and deliver it to your Tory MP. They were never going to win in 1997 or 2001. Probably they were never going to win this one but if they go down to a fourth defeat it will only be because they are congenitally spineless.
Pete_London – No arguments from me. But why are they spineless? It is so bizarre. They lost the will to live when the glaringly incompetent, twizzly Phony Blair managed to blague his way in. Why did this unnerve them so, given that he was obviously a fake? He was nothing. He had no record (not even a test with Ugly Rumours), he couldn’t speak in sentences, he was constantly prancing around with props (remember that bike he rode in Amsterdam or where-ever the hell when he first got elected? Remember that Koran he used to wave getting on and planes in his self-appointed role of ambassador to Islam?), he obviously didn’t have the first idea of a programme in his head except “everyone be nice”.
What, about this poncey jerk, scared the Tories so badly? This has puzzled me for eight years.
Of course if the Tories really want to emulate lemmings, or Oxford students, they could bring in Malcolm Rifkind as their new party leader – an MP of whom a certain Telegraph sketch writer once commented ” I have eaten escargot which had more spine that that man”.
My hope is that David Davis will now finally have his chance to prove that you don’t necessarily have to be a member of the John Major fan club in order to be leader of the Conservative Party.
Malcom Riffkind, not just an invertebrate, but another Scot!
What England needs now is a bifstek – red in tooth and claw – someone muscular who knows how to lay about him and regards holding someone’s ankles so his toes get toasty warm in the fire as friendly persuasion.
No more Celts from the Twilight zone.
What England needs now is a hero.
One of the things I liked about the Sully piece is his skewering of that circus act, Boris Johnson. He has kept us all amused these last few years but it is time the Tories got serious.
As Verity said, the Tories could use a hero. Any grocer’s daughters from Lincolnshire out there?
“The Tories, after all, have been broadly right on major issues over the last decade.” FAT LOT OF USE THAT IS.
“The public services do need reform”: but Toni claims that he will reform them.
“immigration does need more sanity”: Toni will announce a ‘crackdown’.
“the fantasy of a successful euro-zone economy has been exposed as a chimera”: people on the Spanish beach, or in the freebie Tuscan villa, hardly notice.
“taxation is nudging up to its maximum political level”: only the council tax and fuel duties seem to be noticed by the public, yet.
“the economy may well slow under Labour’s heavier taxation and regulation”: when employment drops, when house prices drop, that’s when the penny will drop. The tories had better have got their new leader in place by then.
Read the article in today’s “Times” by Nick Gibb and Gary Streeter if you want to see how the Tories have forgotten nothing and learnt nothing. Essentially, it is the standard New labour-lite nonsense from the Tory “modernisers”. More tax, more spend, more centralisation, more crackdowns, more czars…….but no, positively no steps to create anything like choice within healthcare and education. Not only is that a nasty “middle class” idea (who do the Tories think vote for them?) but it might involve having the humility to acknowledge that the French, the Germans and the Dutch do a few things better than us.
Hmm… the comments section thus far is an ‘all of the above’ option – haven’t read a word I disagree with, and Mr. Sullivan’s remarks were similarly on target.
Michael McGowan’s finger points to the looming horror – one which began it’s latest emergence from the cesspit of British politics some weeks ago – the whining Tory wets.
This is a deeply worrying development and is being fuelled and fired by all the usual suspects in the meejah (tragically, including the Telegraph), all of which seems to be peddling the myth that the Conservatives cannot possibly win unless they become more like Labour.
“Poppycock” seems far too mild a word under the circumstances.
Jonathan – Yes, it was nice to see the irritating Boris Johnson revealed as a long-time showoff and poseur and to read that he’s been doing his schtick for 20 years.
The Tories need to take the vocabulary back. Blair and the slithy toves have been allowed, through the cowardice of the Tories, to subvert our language. “Right” is not a swear word. Neither is “conservative”.
Hitler, Stalin, Mao & Co, were all on the far left. “Left” is a disgusting word that should not be spoken in front of small children.
As a member of the “eccentric” UKIP I feel impressed to comment on Andrew’s statement that the Tories need the clarion call of “freedom” to be the banner to rally to. Unfortunately, as they say in Maine, “Ya can’t get there from here!” Until we divorce ourselves form this unelected, unaccountable, authoritarian machine (European Commission) and its rubber stamp “parliament” how, may I ask, can we expect to throw off the shackles of our own government?
PS – The Tories need to go for the throat as far as the terms “left” and “right” go. Language is a powerful thing. Words are things. They need to use the words “left”, “leftists”, “Gramscians”, “Trotskyites”, “Marxists”, “Fascists” in reference to the Za-Nu Labour Party constantly. Constantly. Constantly.
They need to convey the ruthless message that the left was discovered to be a brutal assault on humanity in the 20th Century and must be killed off.
It is not hard to do!
Verity writes:
“The Tories need to go for the throat as far as the terms “left” and “right” go.”
Absolutely!
I recall commenting here some weeks ago that one of the things the Conservatives needed to do during this recent election was bang on and on and on about the absurd size of the government’s payroll as an inevitable consequence of its Leftist policies – notably by waving copies of the Gruaniad’s ‘Society’ section (or whatever they call the hateful thing) at every possible opportunity. Quite literally – they should have wagged rolled-up copies of the rag across the despatch box and at every opportunity out on the stump.
One of the fundamentals of advertising, established in the 19th Century, is that brand names (for which read ideas) need ramming home until people find themselves reciting them in their sleep.
The Tories tried this on immigration (and whatever the BBC may want people to believe, it worked rather well in London) but they completely failed on the issues of nanny state and bloated government.
As Verity says, they need to make ‘Left’ a term of abuse, not what it is today – the passport to social acceptance in metropolitan society. Americans are often shocked to hear the word ‘Socialist’ used in the UK without the usual associations of gulags and Beria. We need to establish that link here and then broaden it so that people really understand what they are voting for when they vote for either Labour or the Lib-Dems.
Of course, sadly, it is what they will get from Tory wets, too. But that’s a separate issue.
G Cooper writes: “Of course, sadly, it is what they will get from Tory wets, too. But that’s a separate issue.”
True. One step at a time. We need first to turn the word Left and all its associated words into terms of abuse. The Left has a vivid history of human abuse in terms of misery (and death) over the entire 20th Century. Sing it loud! Sing it clear! Over and over again. Left = oppression of the human spirit. I feel strongly that a key to restoring normality in politics is taking control of the vocabulary.
Scarily I know a lot of Tories who are rooting for Rifkind. The argument being, “he’s a decent chap”.
He does seem to be but then so was IDS. Clearly we need David Davis. He seems to have a real moral core about him – and a Thatcherite, small government one, rather than a Heathite paternal autocrat – he’s got charisma, he’s youngish, he’s a new face pretty much and not one of the old guard.
Theres no way Malcolm Rifkind will be winning the next election IMHO.
TLT writes:
“Theres no way Malcolm Rifkind will be winning the next election IMHO.”
Absolutely right!
Regarding David Davis, I get the definite sense that Tory ‘modernisers’ (for which read Tory In Name Only) are going to try every trick in the book to block his progress, aided and abetted by the usual goon patrol from media.
TLTB
Which is why the rules for choosing the leader need to be changed. There are simply far too many in the Shires who prefer a ‘decent chap’ and who have no idea of what’s needed to defeat the government.
My reservation with Davis is that he seems a bit too laid back, not inclined to want, and relish, the task of being bold and brave, of taking on Labour and beating up Blair on a daily basis.
Having said that he’s still the only candidate within a million miles of being even adequate.
Pete_London writes:
“There are simply far too many in the Shires who prefer a ‘decent chap’ and who have no idea of what’s needed to defeat the government.”
That’s an interesting comment. Most of the people I’ve spoken to and heard interviewed (including local Tory activists) have said that the problem (as they see it) stems from the fact that the local constituency Tories are “too Right-wing” and will elect someone the majority of Conservative MPs won’t cooperate with.
They also say that a “Right-wing” leader chosen by the mass members would be unelectable, because, oh, I don’t know… Right-wing Tories eat babies or something.
Not being a Conservative Party member I don’t know which is the more accurate position.
In my response to Pete_London, I should have added that it is claimed by sone that the drive to change the rules is, in fact, coming from the Tory ‘modernisers’ and is, in effect, a device to stop David Davis, or some other perceived champion of the Right being elected.
It’s particularly interesting, therefore, to hear someone express the desire for a rule change who isn’t on the Left.
Howard is trying to blatantly stitch Davis up by changing the voting procedures – while Rifkind might have a lot of support I think most activists really want Davis.
I’m totally puzzled as to Howards motives for this. The people he seems to be trying to kingmake… Oliver Letwin? I never was a fan of his, he’s got the charisma of a wet lettuce. Some say he is really intelligent, wheres the evidence? Whats he done to merit any praise? George Osborne? he’s practically a baby, and he’s an Oxbridge toryboy without the charm of Boris Johnson. Malcolm Rifkind? he seems a nice guy but he’s got a really scary, headmasterish look about him, and he comes from the Dark Times of the Nineties.
Why is Davis so feared they want to change the rules to keep him out and have the above saps anointed instead? I have no idea.
Laid back is good. Tony Blair comes across as laid back but earnest, thats a votewinner. I think Rifkind would come across as too intense. I’m sure Davis would as well if given a position to perform on.
TLT writes:
“I’m totally puzzled as to Howards motives for this.”
I’m glad I’m not alone. I keep hearing that Howard is very close to the so-called ‘Notting Hill set’ – but aren’t they the privileged wets? And isn’t Howard regarded as the Prince of Darkness? What could they have in common?
And yes, I completely agree about Rifkind (I rather liked Martha Kearney’s remark on last night’s Newsnight that he’s known as ‘a Michael Howard tribute band’). Rifkind couldn’t win the Tories an election if his life depended on it. Similarly, I agree about the utterly uncompelling Letwin, who seems a trivial use of carbon, however pleasant he may be.
I don’t know enough about David Davis to decide whether he would be any good, but he would inevitably be a damn sight better than any of the above.
Presumably, that is why he is being conspired against?
Malcolm Rifkind is a Scot. We don’t want any more Scottish prime ministers running Britain, no matter whether they’re good eggs or not.
Osborne – He’s for the long term – if he lasts at the top. He’s tall and imposing looking and will develop presence, which is important in a leader. I’m afraid he may be a W11.
Oliver Letwin is completely out of the question. To call him vapid is to attribute too much electricity to, as TLTB says, damp lettuce. From what I’ve read, David Davies seems to be a true Tory. I haven’t heard him speak, and I don’t know whether he is quick on his feet. This is a critical attribute as T Bliar is the dinosaur of repartée. Except on very rare occasions, he can’t join up thoughts and words fast enough enough for good effect, and he isn’t exactly light on his feet. He’s more like, “Happy. Everyone. Schools. Look!” He talks with what Noel Coward, referring to similar personalities, called “turgid intensity”.
DD wrote a piece in the Torygraph today I see…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/05/11/do1102.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/05/11/ixportal.html
He really is as good as it gets I think.
… Unless we’re talking about Gordon “Patsy” Brown taking over from Phoney after the Labour Party conference this year I trust. Regarding Rifkind’s ambitions I agree with the current view that modesty should forbid someone from making a bid for the leadership of the Conservative Party within 12 hours of being elected into Kensington & Chelsea. We do not want this man leading the Conservative Party, he can not stand up to criticism, is unable to defend his own views let alone his party’s policies and does not come across on the media at all well – in front of Paxman he appears as a startled mouse caught in the headlights of an oncoming truck.
Illustrating my point I would refer to the ITV London debates during the election. Attempting to rubbish Julia Stephenson, the Green party candidate who stood solely to limit the numbers of SUV’s in Chelsea, he said on live TV, “my mother felt she showed far too much cleavage in her picture on the front of her manifesto” – a bit like being savaged by a dead sheep, as was once said about Geoffrey Howe.
Let Davis have 4 years clear leadership and if he can’t hack it then allow George Osborne to take over after that.
Mais, que’est-ce qui se passe? Ce blog me semble tout à fait fou! Les idées politiques exprimées ici n’ont aucun lien avec la réalité. Heureusement que les soi-disant “libertaires de droite” n’atteindront jamais le pouvoir. Dieu soit loué! Vive la gauche et que le diable prenne la droite!
Mais, que’est-ce qui se passe? Ce blog me semble tout à fait fou! Les idées politiques exprimées ici n’ont aucun lien avec la réalité. Heureusement que les soi-disant “libertaires de droite” n’atteindront jamais le pouvoir. Dieu soit loué! Vive la gauche et que le diable prenne la droite!
M. Outrage, go and read some Frederick Bastiat. Ever heard of him?
Given the state that France is in these days – double-digit unemployment, etc – some humility from your side of the English Channel would not go amiss.
Adieu!