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]
|
Those of us who lived through the previous end of Labour rule, in 1979, recall how that moment was remembered as the time when rubbish was lying in the road uncollected, thanks to strikes by the bin men. That little story summed it all up, and ushered in an age of union bashing. And Labour Party bashing, for several general elections.
Will this story be the abiding memory of the end of Labour rule now?
Civil servants came under increasing pressure from ministers in the dying months of the Labour government to carry out expensive orders that they disagreed with and responded by submitting an unprecedented number of formal protests in the run-up to the general election.
The five separate protests came in the form of written ministerial directions – requested by the most senior civil servant in a department when they disagree with a minister’s decision so strongly that they refuse to be accountable for it.
For me that perfectly captures the public squalour that is always unleashed by dead-on-their-feet Labour governments, as they madly pursued that last ounce of private affluence for their various client groups, and damn the consequences for the country.
Labourites are now pinning their hopes for an early return to office on the notion that the government that now has to clean up their mess will get most of the blame for that mess.
This is partly why Labour sorched all that earth. It wasn’t only tribal greed. It was deliberate political calculation. But if it becomes firmly established that the current mess is indeed a Labour mess, and that all the grief that followed immediately after their time in government was Labour grief, then Labour could be out of business for far longer than they now calculate.
Personally, I hope Labour are out of business for ever. And see also this posting I did for here a couple of years ago, which also had “scorched earth” in its title. This holds up quite well now, I think, especially the final sentence, as do many of the comments.
Michael Jennings then argued, from the behaviour of idiot Australian voters in similar circumstances, that as soon as the mess is cleared up, Labour spendthrifts will be back to create more mess, to scorch more earth. I really hope he’s wrong. But then, two years ago, I also hoped that the above kind of behaviour would itself cause a Labour electoral wipe-out, and that didn’t really happen, did it?
Maybe the Conservatives will now decide that the mess must never be cleared up, that the earth must remain permanently scorched, so that the country never feels able to afford a Labour government ever again. This certainly seems to be their current policy. Which might be great for the Conservatives. Shame about the country.
When a party loses power after an election it is traditional for departing ministers to leave personal notes to their successors, usually consisting of advice on how to do the job. In a rare and beautiful display of political honesty, the departing Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Liam Byrne, wrote the following to David Laws, the Liberal Democrat who is taking over:
“Dear chief secretary, I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck! Liam.”
This almost reached the sublime level of the parting message of Reginald Maudling to the new Chancellor James Callaghan in 1964: “Good luck, old cock … Sorry to leave it in such a mess.”
Many of the relatively new Docklands Light Railway stations I’ve passed through, often being situated on old or new viaducts, or part of similarly elevated main line stations, have offered fine views of the eastern parts of London, which is where many of the big towers are. Yesterday afternoon I took my camera with me in search of more such stations with views. I was not disappointed, and the weather, not good of late, was also on my side.
Pretty much by chance, I found myself at this station:
From this quaintly named viewpoint, I saw what I at first thought was some kind of football stadium. But, it seemed not to be finished. What could it be?
Also, other building was going on not too far away, by London standards. I love a good crane cluster:
But what was it all? Then I saw a weird object looking like a giant deep sea fish. This could only mean one thing: an unpopular sport of the kind that Needs Government Help. This wasn’t football. Of course! This is where the Olympic Games are going to happen:
All those wires in the sky are because regular trains go past this station, although they don’t stop there.
Here’s another picture, relevant to those above, this time of the front page of the London Evening Standard from last Friday:
By us, Mayor Boris means me and my fellow Londoners. Here is the story.
I cursed the day that London got these damn games on the day it got them. It looks like all other London taxpayers will soon be doing the same. And I will be very surprised if all other UK taxpayers don’t end up agreeing, despite what that “Culture Minister” says.
The “GREED IS GOOD” thing concerns Michael Douglas, pictured in the picture, reprising Gordon Gekko. I dare say we will soon all learn that the entire recent economic meltdown was Gekko’s fault. Nothing to do with crazy government monetary policy. But banking, like the Olympic Games, is a nationalised industry, and each is as economically out of control as the other.
In May 1979 I was walking over Hungerford Bridge a day or two after the election that brought Margaret Thatcher to power. I saw in the distance a small embarrassed-looking group gathering to take part in some sort of march or demonstration to protect union rights. I was not happy about Mrs Thatcher’s victory, earnest young leftie that I was, but I remember thinking, at least she’ll stomp on the unions.
I gather that there has been some sort of political development today.
Finish this sentence, if you can: At least he’ll….
Can it be? Do my eyes deceive me? An MP… a Tory MP… who seems to have a grasp of economics!
How long before this guy gets a visit from the party whip advising him that insightful talk about real world economics might be harmful to his career, capice?
The election has dealt a major blow to the political class, though it hasn’t been a catharsis; we still hate them.
– Raedwald
It is amusing to be honest. The Tory party faces a PM with no actual mandate, who is as charismatic as a bowl of cold Scottish porridge and who has presided over economically calamitous times… and the best the Tory Party can do is… 36.1 percent.
I now look forward to some bracing political paralysis and hopefully the unedifying mess of a hanged… I mean hung parliament… hanged would be most edifying indeed. With a little luck the inevitable steaming pile of discordant political prima donnas will further discredit the whole establishment with their antics.
I can only hope that in the coming months this period will do lasting damage to the Tory party in order to provide a wedge of daylight for the likes of Libertarians and UKIP to exploit.
The ‘Middle of the Road’ is where you generally find road kill.
Well, it was Samizdata wot won it. Perry de Havilland said a plague on all their houses last week. Chris Cooper said last night that he’d voted for none of the above. And the result? None of the above. A plague on all their houses. Who says blogs don’t have any influence?
Here are the various plagues:
Conservatives: A horror story. No absolute majority. Will Cameron manage to contrive an absolute majority after another general election? (Think 1974.) Will he be able to contrive any kind of government in the meantime? Maybe and maybe, but there’s a world out there, and what Cameron has to do about that may make him even less electorally appealing than he is now. Cameron has been all at sea ever since the boom went bust. As have …
Labour: A horror story. In terms of percentage of the vote, Michael Foot did a tiny bit worse in 1983 than Brown. That’s Brown’s only comfort. But now, do they try to cling on or do they walk away? Neither choice makes them look good. Unelectedness versus “we made the mess but the rest of you must sort it out”.
LibDems: A horror story. Cleggmania fizzled out ignominiously. Yet they can still decide everything, in the short run. So which of two profoundly unappealing big parties do the LibDems pick? Neither choice makes them look good. Plus: do they plunge the political system into a huge row about proportional representation? But the problem is not how they’re picked; it’s what the hell they now do about that world out there. And what the hell kind of “mandate” do the LibDems now have to demand anything at all? Yet if Clegg comes away from all this with nothing, what will his party think?
Others: BNP, UKIP, Greens, etc. My impression is UKIP did not too shabbily, but not too shabbily doesn’t really count. At least the Greenies got a stuffing. SNP hardly laid a glove on Labour in Scotland.
Just heard a politician talking on the telly – I think somebody called Tony McNulty:
“Anyone who thinks this is a good result for any party, locally or nationally, needs their head examining.”
Boris Johnson agrees. Now I’m watching him say that the voters hate all the politicians, and have found a way to make all of them suffer. All those us who wanted the whole damn lot of them squirming as a result of this election have now got our wish.
Now Brown is making a speech. He’s trying to cling on.
“The answer to our woes, is a devolved English Parliament. Let the four constituent nations go their own separate way. let Scotland have independence, let Salmond have his way. Lets the Welsh & the Welsh and Northern Irish go. We moan on this site about the Internal Aid department, well how about we look a bit closer to home. England again has voted overwhelming Conservative, except this morning we are still governed by a party that is led and draws its legitimacy from the huge client state that is Scotland. All the usual suspects will whitter on about the unfairness of the FpTP system, whilst ignoring the biggest unfairness of all.”
Written by a character called Paul B, over at the Spectator’s Coffee House blog.
I happen increasingly to agree. While I yield to no-one in my admiration for much of what Scotland has brought to Britain and to the wider world – this book is a wonderful description – the brutal fact is that Scotland is now exerting an outrageously one-sided, and disproportionate, influence on British affairs. Its politicians have carefully natured a client state in the big cities such as Glasgow, where a huge proportion of the locals subsist on state benefits. If, as the Coffee House commenter suggests, we were to make it possible for Scotland to operate as an independent nation, then the Scottish Labour Party machine, a profoundly corrupt one and similar to the Chicago Democrat machine that gave the US Barack Obama would no longer exert its malign influence on England’s affairs.
It is time to cut Scotland loose, both for its interest, and more to the point, for those who want to see the back of the Scottish Labour Party and its arm-lock on UK affairs for the past decade and a half.
In the meantime, I suspect that the international bond market is going to have the casting vote on what happens next after this inconclusive election.
An hour after the polls closed, and the BBC has tortured its exit poll to death. They keep on talking it down, because they can’t believe that the LIb Dems can really have lost seats, as the exit poll says.
A single election result is in. A rock-solid Labour majority has been slightly dented by the Conservative swing. Vernon Bogdanor extrapolates it to say that the Conservatives will get an overall majority.
The limited pleasure of the election broadcast will fade soon. I enjoyed the first few minutes as the BBC’s ludicrously garish setup battled with good old-fashioned gremlins. One panel of a giant bar graph of the projected seats vanished for several minutes. Michael Gove’s artificially rejuvenated mug loomed at us while his mike failed utterly. Jeremy Paxman bellowed at an interviewee as if he could make him respond faster that way, for all the world as if he’d never encountered satellite delay before.
Mariella Frostrup thinks it’s terrible that we’re all in (strangely pronounced) thrall to the markets, and what a pity we haven’t invented a better and more humane way to manage our finances. Watching her say that makes me want to go to bed, and not in a good way.
Oh bloody hell. Jeremy Vine is knocking down huge trains of CGI dominoes for some reason. Generations yet unborn will injure themselves laughing at the Beeb’s presentation tonight.
It’s conceivable, although I promise nothing, that I may do some of this “live blogging” thing, come the early hours of tomorrow morning. It depends on my mood at the time, and on such things as computer availability, dongle workability and so forth and so on.
Somehow I doubt that Perry de Havilland will be hanging on every result. And oh look, he just said it again, see immediately below!
So, if none of us here manage it, but if you nevertheless hunger for this kind of thing, how about paying attention this this guy?
If I can keep my eyes open I intend to stay up most of the night and blog about the incoming results.
In particular (and at risk of sounding disturbingly anal) I intend to monitor the fate of those candidates who voted for and against the smoking ban. (Yes, really.)
I shall be looking out for some preferred candidates including Philip Davies, Greg Knight, Robert Halfon, Annesley Abercorn (Conservative), Kate Hoey (Labour), Lembit Opik (Lib Dem), Nigel Farage (UKIP), Martin Cullip (Libertarian), Old Holborn (Independent) and one or two others.
I shall also be passing comment on the election coverage, much of which will be viewed through the bottom of a glass, darkly.
Well, if it’s your kind of thing, he says he’s going to start around 10 pm. Maybe Perry might even want to give it a glance. He and Simon Clark of Taking Liberties, who wrote the words quoted above and to whom thanks for the email alerting me to this, do seem to be on the same wavelength.
Benedict Brogan wrote a Telegraph article called “Election 2010: a bracing reminder of the price we pay for political freedom“, in which he notes the cost to Britain’s young soldiers in Afghanistan in juxtaposition with the scenes of election tumult.
Well I can think of several arguably good reasons for western troops to be fighting in Afghanistan but I sure hate to think of anyone dying for political freedom… freedom, sure… but that qualifying word in front does rather change things. Politics is what we call the struggle to control the means of collective coercion. It may be a process we cannot avoid but it is, at best, a necessary evil… and most of the time it is just evil without the necessary.
Freedom is essential and worth fighting for… but anyone who died to defend political anything died for all the wrong reasons. What does ‘political freedom’ even mean in Britain? The right to vote who gets to rape you?
Britain’s political system is not something to get all misty eyed about because most politics has nothing whatsoever to do with “freedom” but rather forcing people to do things they would rather not do. It is for the most part about people using the proxy violence of the state to take things they want and punish people they do not like far more often than it is about dealing with the genuine collective threats of plague, disorder and war.
And as for this being an ‘extraordinary’ election, as the linked article claims, I cannot recall one where it mattered less which of the largely interchangeable plonkers on offer gets into Number 10. All that will change is which of set of rapacious thugs says who gets snout space at Westminster’s trough filled with other people’s money. But of course many will vote Tory on the ‘lesser evil’ principle and no doubt act surprised when Cameron more or less does all the things he has said he will do to prop up the intrusive regulatory welfare state. People voting for an ever so slightly lesser evil (and quite possibly not even that) will get exactly what they vote for… another evil government. Nice one, guys.
Today is the day that nothing important really changes.
|
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.
|
