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]

Tony Blair’s brother

I don’t think philosophically there’s a meeting of minds between Ayn Rand and Our Glorious Leader, Tony Blair:

I am not my brother’s keeper. – Ayn Rand

I am my brother’s keeper.Tony Blair

You might think that being your brother’s keeper is fine. But when Tony Blair says that he is his brother’s keeper, what he actually means is that he wants to force everyone else to be this. The statement isn’t about him at all. If he really subscribed to the moral code he advocates, surely he would donate most of his income to the poor. Then again, when you hear middle-class socialists demanding higher taxes, and you ask them how much extra they personally should pay, they often reply back that only “the rich” – people richer than they are – should pay more.

17 comments to Tony Blair’s brother

  • Tony Benn is worse. In a speech I heard him give last year he said, literally, “I am my brother’s keeper; I will not cross a picket line”. So apparently when Cain asked God if he was his brother’s keeper, he was simply requesting advice on whether to become a ‘scab’ or not. How about that?

  • Julian Morrison

    When someone says or implies “I am my brother’s keeper”, think “zookeeper”.

  • George Peery

    Jeez, so much cynicism! The “brother’s keeper” business is a Biblical reference – just the sort of reference a politician would make when speaking to something called the Christian Socialist Movement. What’s the big deal?

  • The big deal is we do not want to be under the control of Christian Socialists

  • George Peery

    Perry, you are under Tony and New Labour, not Christian Socialists.

  • They are quite an influential group within NuLab actually.

  • George Peery

    I wouldn’t have thought Britain was right on the verge of a theocratic putsch. But I suppose one can never to too careful about such thing.

  • mark holland

    Christian Socialists? As PJ O’Rourke points out (in Eat the Rich I think) how do they get over that oh so tricky 10th commandment

    TEN: ‘You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.’

    Ain’t that a bind!

  • Richard Garner

    [i]they often reply back that only “the rich” – people richer than they are – should pay more[/i]

    There is, of course, nothing wrong with thinking the rich should pay more; only with thinking that they should be forced to do so. Nobody here thinks libertarianism is incompatible with the idea that there are certain ways we should behave even if we aren’t forced to do so, right?

  • George Peery

    There is, of course, nothing wrong with thinking the rich should pay more; only with thinking that they should be forced to do so.

    Debating the relative merits of progressive taxation is about as productive (and interesting) as debating the density of angels on the head of a pin.

  • Ex-union member

    Some things I have never come across;

    A poor, (in the literal sense), socialist politician. Even the so-called ‘working class’ ones’ seem to have plenty of spending money.

    A philanthropic socialist politician. Only with other peoples money.

    A socialist politician who has done more than one days’ honest toil, either for a wage, or in the service of others.

    A socialist politician who was not a loud-mouth.

    A socialist politician who was not a hypocrite.

    Any politician who did not get more stupid as they got older. (Shirley Williams springs to mind).

    Looking at the above, I think that it might all apply to all politicians, they really are a scurvy binch…

  • I’d like to see progressive taxationists asked to reveal two numbers in this order:

    1. The threshold of what counts as rich according to Mr X.
    2. How much Mr X earns or has.

    We know do we by the way that the angels dancing on the head of a pin was never a real theological debate, but a piece of abuse from a critic of a theological debate? Just checking!

  • speedwell

    Actually, the angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin reference was a sort-of attempt to poke fun at the debate about whether angels were corporeal (had mass, shape, etc.) or noncorporeal (like “ghosts”). This debate was real at the time, part of a larger debate over the nature of God, and apparently had various theologians screeching serious bloody heresy at those who held the opposite viewpoint. (“We do know this, don’t we? Just checking.”)

    Personally, as an atheist, I don’t give a rat’s. (And I kind of like the implication that I’m reviving the whole useless debate, heh.)

  • Guy Herbert

    You could be an atheiest who happens to believe in angels, but not gods, surely, Speedwell?

    Since Tony Blair’s brother is a distinguished tax barrister, I imagine he’s just saying it to remind Gordon Brown who’s ultimately in charge of fiscal policy (after God, of course).

  • Things that Ex-Union Member had never seen:

    A poor, (in the literal sense), socialist politician. Even the so-called ‘working class’ ones’ seem to have plenty of spending money. Well, yeah – they get paid to be politicians. Plenty of socialist politicians come from poor backgrounds, however. Ever heard of Aneurin Bevan?

    A philanthropic socialist politician. Only with other peoples money.
    How about Paul Hamyln? – although I guess he was more of an activist than a politician. In general, socialists are unlikely to become rich enough to be remembered as great philanthropists; you make a comfortable living as a lawyer, but to make serious cash you need to do something more entrepreneurial.

    A socialist politician who has done more than one days’ honest toil, either for a wage, or in the service of others.
    See Bevan above. In the current Labour cabinet, how about Prescott? Being a sailor certainly isn’t a poncy middle-class desk job.

    A socialist politician who was not a loud-mouth.
    Chris Smith? Stafford Cripps?

    A socialist politician who was not a hypocrite.
    If that sentence had any meaning, answering it would be easier.

    Any politician who did not get more stupid as they got older. (Shirley Williams springs to mind).
    Blair, and all the other former far-left radicals in his cabinet?

  • Cydonia

    John b:

    Actually John Prescott was a steward. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but it’s not exactly the coalface.

    Chris Smith not a loudmouth? How about:

    “On Breakfast with Frost this morning the Culture Secretary Chris Smith said much of the blame for the failure of the Dome could be laid at the media’s door. He said deliberate denigration of the project had put visitors off. ”

    “Channel 5 has come under fire from Culture Secretary Chris Smith in the wake of its nude game show Naked Jungle. The minister told MPs that while the Government should not step in, he had a “moral duty” to the public.”

    “The Culture Secretary, Chris Smith, has joined the criticism of the BBC over the decision to drop the television programme One Man and his Dog.
    The contest, pitting a shepherd and his dog against a flock of sheep has run on BBC 2 for 23 years. ”

    “Culture Secretary Chris Smith has told English local authorities it would “simply not be acceptable” to close libraries to save money.”

    “Culture Secretary Chris Smith has backed the sacking of Blue Peter presenter Richard Bacon after he admitted taking cocaine. ”

    “Culture Secretary Chris Smith has come out against plans by ITV to ditch its flagship News at Ten programme, saying it should be kept to “counterbalance” the BBC news. ”

    blah blah blah

    Cydonia

  • Verity

    john b is so wrong on almost every point he makes, one wonders why on earth he bothered.

    Cydonia has ably dealt with John Prescott and the creepy Chris Smith. His other points:

    “plenty of socialists come from poor backgrounds”. Their childhood wasn’t the point of contention. What was said is, they usually manage to worm themselves into cozy situations. This point was not refuted.

    I must confess I don’t know who Paul Hamlyn is.

    Aneurin Bevan – Wasn’t he involved in the start of the National Health Service and basically nationalising Britain after WWII, thereby being accountable for untold misery of generations? Was he one of the ones responsible for continuing food rationing into the 1950s?

    “A socialist politician who is not a hypocrite.” Why imply that this sentence has no meaning? It seems easy enough to understand to me.

    Best of all, he cites Blair and the current gang that couldn’t shoot straight in the British cabinet as people who have not become progressively more addled as time goes by. Well, for example, they seem to think they’re an effective government. How stupid is that? They’re still far left radicals, every man jack of them. They’ve just developed the low cunning to develop (rather ineffective) camouflage.