August 03, 2017

Thursday politics

At school we were disciplined not to judge actions in history by the moral fashions of today. But I find it impossible not to be disgusted by the politicians and commanders in the First World War.

This is partly because the history is relatively recent, but mainly because of our √©lite's commemoration ceremonies. Of course they emphasise "sacrifice" and "heroism" and don't glorify the slaughter. But the calm, contemplative  ceremonies act as a salve.

I want to howl with fury thinking of the thousands forced into the terror of war and horrific wounds and ghastly deaths. The ceremonies themselves provoke that outrage. It just was not all right to force my grandfathers' generation to be fodder for the machine guns, in deep mud. Stately mourning has its place, but for me the overwhelming reaction to the state's embrace of this carnage back then is rage.


"Public" bodies funded by the state are out of control. They're usually described as "publicly funded", as if that makes them sound somehow benign. In fact they're paid for by taxpayers, but we don't get to sit at the table. He who pays the piper calls the tune, it is said. Not in our case. No one seems to be able to curb the pay and empires of hospital managers. Now the spotlight is turning on to administrators at universities, many of which are not much good anyway. We wait to see whether Jo Johnson will join Jeremy Hunt in the pit of uselessness.

Why does this fall to a middle ranking minister anyway? Secretaries of State are busying themselves with passing the energy prices parcel, or getting into trouble over gender fluidity - where the government deserves all the enemy fire it has chosen to march towards.

Doubtless all this was approved by the inadequate in Number 10. The Tories are hugely to blame for choosing a leader so predictably and obviously useless.


Would I like to canvass for the Tories? No ... why ever would I want to do that? They want to throw money we haven't got at Hinkley Point C, and HS2. There's no business case for either. And they don't even have the excuse that these projects are popular. At DIFID Priti Patel has gone native, and Philip Hammond is continuing his blithe contempt for his electorate by proclaiming aid for Brazil.

What is this hapless government doing that might be popular? Why would  I want to campaign for this shower?


Remainers profess astonishment at a recent opinion poll showing many Leavers would still want to Brexit even if it damaged our economy. Cue much tutting and shaking of heads.

This is wholly unsurprising. A cast of the great and the good warned us of dire economic consequences if we voted Leave. None of them have come to pass so far, so it's hard to see why Leavers' resolve would have been dented.

Brexit is about sovereignty.

Our politicians and commentators intone that we do not wish the EU ill. It's not reciprocated. They demand their citizens living here should have the protection of the ECJ. This imperialism ("civis EU sum") must be intended to provoke. If I settle in Spain, I don't expect to be able to be able to appeal to courts in London, despite the growing evidence of Spanish corruption. If you choose to live in another country, you live by their laws (even if you chose Venezuela). The EU understands this, of course. When they are being deliberately unreasonable, why would it be wrong for me to wish their edifice harm?


L fairfax said...

About this
" A cast of the great and the good warned us of dire economic consequences if we voted Leave. None of them have come to pass so far, so it's hard to see why Leavers' resolve would have been dented."
We had similar warnings about leaving the ERM and not joining the Euro.
Talk about crying wolf.

geebeetwo said...

We haven't left yet so no wonder they haven't come to pass . The real fact about all of this is that those who voted to leave had not the remotest idea of what the effects would be economically. Phrases like "we shall be Ok" were cheap and very popular but no one had the faintest idea of how leaving might impact those whose financial circumstances are not rock solid.
I voted to stay because a leap into the financial dark seemed to me to be a stupid move for very little tangible return ,in fact a likely negative result . But then I don't feel like I'm in a EU prison and I don't think we have shown any signs of dynamic successful government for years with no prospect of that changing.
If it all goes well then fine, the gamble wasn't a disaster,if it goes pearshaped I don't doubt that it will be anyone's fault who voted leave.

John Page said...

The economic damage was predicted to start immediately after the vote, not just when we Left.

geebeetwo said...

There were lots of predictions by anyone who was asked and many who weren't. Prices have gone up and that impacts most on the lower income groups . But this was my point, no one ever said we would be economically better off by leaving, merely that we would take back our affairs and make our own decisions.
This assumes we have the nous in government to make it all better . We don't. Neither do those in Brussels but at least they have abigger pool to choose from.