UkPoliBlog: Composite feed

Book Review: Marx's Das Kapital: A Biography, by Frances Wheen : ORGANIZED RAGE

I thoroughly enjoyed Francis Wheen's book about the life of Marx, whilst it does not quite go into the detail of Karl Marx: A Biography, By David McLellan, I found it a far more enjoyable book to read, so I thought I would post up a review of Wheen's latest book.

Mick

Marx's Das Kapital: A Biography:
By Frances Wheen

Reviewed by Alex Miller. *â¨â¨Atlantic Books 2006â¨130 pages

Frances Wheen, who produced an entertaining (if over-hyped) biography of Karl Marx in 1999, returns to Marx with a biography'' of the revolutionary philosopher's most famous and important single work, in the series from Atlantic called Books That Shook The World. Wheen gives a readable account of the genesis of Das Kapital, interweaving the tale of Marx's personal and political life with brief descriptions of Marx's earlier works in the lead-up to the oft-promised and oft-delayed publication of his magnum opus in 1867.

Unlike most commentators, Wheen conveys a vivid sense of Das Kapital's vastly under-appreciated qualities as a great work of literature, infinitely superior in this regard to the bourgeois political economists whose work Marx trounced on purely scientific grounds: ``The book can be read as a vast Gothic novel whose heroes are enslaved and consumed by the monster they created.''

Wheen does a good job of destroying some of the myths that surround the book. For example, he recounts how British Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson claimed never to have read it, giving up because of a page-long footnote on page 2. As Wheen points out, a glance at page 2 of the book reveals this to be a wild exaggeration.

Another example concerns the familiar claim that Marx's predictions about the progressive immiseration of the proletariat under capitalism have been refuted by the actual development of capitalism in the late 20th and early 21st centuries: "Countless pundits have taken this to mean that capitalism's swelling prosperity would be achieved by an absolute reduction in the workers' wages and standard of living, and they have found it easy to mock. Look at the working classes of today, with their cars and microwave ovens: not very immiserated, are they?''.

Wheen points out that the idea that Marx has been refuted in this way is based on a complete misreading of Chapter 25 of Das Kapital: Marx in fact argued only that under capitalism there would be a relative, as opposed to absolute decline in wages, and Wheen shows that this is in fact ``demonstrably true''.
In addition, Wheen makes the excellent point that ``immiseration'' concerns not just the wages workers receive, but how long and how hard they have to work in order to get them.

And in fact: "The average British employee now puts in 80,224 hours over his or her working life, as against 69,000 hours in 1981. Far from losing the [capitalist] work ethic, we seem ever more enslaved by it''. Wheen quotes Marx's uncanny prescience regarding this in a passage in Chapter 12: "We may read on one page that the worker owes a debt of gratitude to capital for developing his productivity, because the necessary labour time is thereby shortened, and on the next page that he must prove his gratitude in future for 15 hours instead of 10.'' So much for the imminent leisure age predicted in the 1970s by apologists for capitalism!

There are parts of the book where Wheen is less convincing. For example, in the chapter on the influence of Das Kapital after Marx's death, by highly deceptive selective quotation from What Is To Be Done?, Wheen portrays Lenin as laying out an abstract blueprint for the future tyrannies of Stalinism. This is an all too familiar trick, and it is a pity that Wheen succumbs to the temptation to play it.

Also, Wheen objects to the labour theory of value (according to which the exchange value of a commodity is determined by the socially necessary amount of labour time required to produce it): "Why do people sometimes pay hundreds of thousands of pounds for a single diamond ring or pearl necklace? Mightn't these extraordinary prices also owe something to scarcity value, or perceptions of beauty, or even to simple one-upmanship?''

But this is a weak objection. For one thing, there is a difference between the concepts of exchange value and price. True, Marx and the classical political economists generally held that in the long run, the prices of commodities tend in the direction of their exchange values. However, this clearly does not imply that the price of each and every commodity sold on the market is equivalent to its exchange value.

Moreover, even waiving this point there is a further problem with Wheen's objection: as almost any modern philosopher of science will attest, empirical explanatory theories are confirmed or disconfirmed on the basis of their capacity to furnish a whole body of predictions. The holistic nature of theory confirmation means that a theory can issue in an inaccurate prediction yet still be confirmed overall if the theory's predictions on sufficiently many and sufficiently important other matters are sound. So even if the labour theory of value did yield the wrong prediction about the exchange value of a diamond ring, it might still be justified in virtue of its capacity to predict the exchange values of more common commodities or, at a further remove, the long-term qualitative characteristics of the capitalist mode of production.

And, indeed, Wheen acknowledges the greatness of Marx's achievement in just this regard: despite some wildly over-optimistic predictions about the imminence of socialist revolution, Marx pulled off the remarkable feat of accurately portraying the general shape and qualitative character of globalized capitalism in the 21st century from the vantage point of its infancy in one small part of the world in the 19th century. In this respect, no bourgeois economist or social scientist has ever come near to Marx.

Wheen concludes: "Marx's errors or unfulfilled prophecies about capitalism are eclipsed and transcended by the piercing accuracy with which he revealed the nature of the beast. While all that is solid melts into air, Das Kapital's vivid portrayal of the forces that govern our lives - and of the instability, alienation, and exploitation they produce - will never lose its resonance, or its power to bring it into focus. Far from being buried under the rubble of the Berlin Wall, Marx may only now be emerging in his true significance. He could yet become the most influential thinker of the 20th century.''
Readers of Wheen's stimulating book will leave it with the desire to tackle Marx's masterpiece for themselves: for this especially, Wheen is to be commended.**

*Alex Miller is a member of the Scottish Socialist Party and of the Democratic Socialist Perspective in the Australian Socialist Alliance. Abridged versions of these reviews first appeared in the Australian socialist newspaper Green Left Weekly.

** http://links.org.au/node/394

The Senior Retainer, Mr Salmond And Ms Alexander Are Discussing The Future Of The Union With The Levity Of Children Arguing Over A Game Of Conkers. : Kirk Elder, Senior Citizen from Peebles

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor and the danger, yes he said danger, of reason : Vowles the Green in Knowle

Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor's standard of argument on Radio 4's Today progam this morning was apalling (he obviously sticks more to faith than thinking). His view is that societies would degrade into totalitarian dictatorships such as those under Hitler or Stalin if based on reason alone. Yes, this is an accurate summary of one of his main points, such as there were, when questioned by John Humphrey's about why we should believe in god and why religion should have the very prominent place it has in our secular society (you can listen to the interview again here, as well as an earlier one with Prof Richard Dawkins giving the atheist view). He sees reason as dangerous!! Does the Cardinal not see that rule under Hitler and Stalin was certainly not based upon reason? Does the Cardinal not see that in fact faith (in a leader and in a single ideology like Nazism or Communism...) played an enormous role in the dictatorships of Hitler and Stalin? I think the reverse of what the Cardinal said is in fact true - we are much more likely to be ruled over by a dictator, including (or perhaps especially) a religious dictator, if we dont see and use the full value of doubt, questioning and reason.

The Cardinal wants '...improved dialogue between believers and non-believers to establish the shared values that sustain Britain's plural society.' The dialogue in the interview was a very, very poor start at this 'improvement'. Science and reason cannot and will not ever explain everything fully. It should not be regarded as the be all and end all of knowledge types. However, the answer to questions like: who designed the designer that, apparently, created us? (what designer ?) ; and what is a good explanation of how life came about? (evolution by natural selection), means that I will remain of the view that the existence of god is extremely unlikely until much better evidence and arguments surface !! It is indeed convenient for Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor to describe god as 'mysterious' !!

MP's Allowances : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

Would every other leader do worse? : UK Polling Report

Today's YouGov poll was also reported as showing that any alternative Labour leader would perform even worse than Gordon Brown. YouGov gave respondents a list of other politicians and asked if people would be more or less likely to vote Labour in a general election if they were leader - all had a negative net score, with more people saying they would be less likely to vote Labour with them in charge than more likely.

I would be very dubious indeed about these questions for two reasons. Firstly there's the question design - less or more likely doesn't tell you that much. Many of the people who said they would be more likely to vote Labour with X in charge already vote Labour, so yes - having that person in charge might firm up their support but isn't winning more votes. Many people who say they would be less likely to vote Labour with X in charge are already not voting Labour, so it may be driving them even further away, but since they aren't voting Labour anyway it's not necessarily much of a loss. If you must do questions like this, it's better to ask people how they would vote if X, Y and Z were party leaders, giving alternative Labour leaders in different versions of the question.

Even then though (and I'd be amazed if some questions like that didn't come along sooner or later), the questions would be pretty meaningless. Regular readers will remember the questions we had when Tony Blair was Prime Minister that asked how people would vote if Gordon Brown was leader. Back then I had to laden down the results with lots of caveats about people not being very good predictors of how they would react to future events and that, in practice, Brown would probably get a big boost upon being leader. In the event he did, but a few months later he was trailing in the polls in much the way those pre-Brown polls had predicted. Those were a special case though, since Brown had been a very prominent politician for the previous decade and the public knew him well and knew what he was like. It could have turned out very differently and Brown could have shown a completely different side of his personality as Prime Minister... he didn't, he was the same Gordon Brown and people reacted in the way they thought they would. But the fact remains he could have surprised them.

In this case, with the possible exception of Jack Straw, none of the possible replacements for Brown are widely known by the public. YouGov took this into account to some extent in today's poll by giving respondents the option of saying they didn't know enough about each person (38% gave that response for James Purnell and Andy Burnham, 16% for David Miliband, 6% for Jack Straw), but the problem is really unsurmountable. People can't say how their opinions would really change were Andy Burnham or James Purnell Prime Minister since they've little or no idea of who they are, what they are like or what on earth they would do or change as Prime Minister.

If Brown's leadership starts to come under real pressure then expect more polls like this...but unless they are about very well known politicians treat them as just a bit of fun.

Alcohol may be banned nationally... : Westmonster

Here at Westmonster we like alcohol. We can think of few things better than the languid conversation that it inspires, or the afternoons that we've wasted in beer gardens amongst the beer redolent spillage of our more inebriated friends and their cigarette smoke. And what about that special rummy brand of halitosis? Would summer really be summer without it? Sometimes we even like drinking in public. Few things are more refined than a refreshing can of Special Brew down at the bus stop. Or what about a discount bottle of Tesco's red under the pale moonlight? Drunken contemplation of some graffiti-clad park bench to remind you that you're truly living, that Judy is a fat slag, and that Wazza bonked Bozza? Yes please.. How about a nice cup of tea with a well slipped mickey in it down the local caff? Would the English still be the English without any of these long-established proclivities? It looks like we soon might have to be...Read more...

Ironman versus Batman : Gavin's Blog

Via John.

Darth Vader cafeteria : Gavin's Blog

Hilarious Izzard.

Working hard at Bulmers : Gavin's Blog

De lads in Clonmel were sacked for this video:

It's actually rather well done.

Un-Enlightenment - redux : Slugger O'Toole

BBC NI's Will Crawley is having somewhat of a Creation Weekend [to atone for past sins? - Ed]. On Sunday Sequence, 9am Radio Ulster, he will be discussing this "dramatic serialisation" of the Book of Genesis.. and before that he's visiting the Waterfront Hall where the founder of Answers in Genesis USA, Ken Ham - previously mentioned here - is hosting an 2-day event. Do tell us if you spot any NI Executive Ministers there, Will. Some of us like to keep an eye on what they're up to with the Giants Causeway.. What with The Un-Enlightenment already being promoted elsewhere..

Post Office Closures Slammed - Brake : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

'Drug Report has it wrong' says Weston-super-Mare MP : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

GOVERNMENT VOWS TO CUT MAGISTRATES' SENTENCING POWERS : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

Police Authority Meets Ministers to Discuss Capping : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

Rain Colbert dance off : Gavin's Blog

Something to get you ready for the weekend:

Brassneck: 10th most influential blog in Britainâ¦ : Slugger O'Toole

So says a recent poll by Editorial Intelligence. For those of you who have not yet tumbled, Brassneck is a blog I have been writing for the Daily Telegraph for the last six months or so. The poll was amongst ‘a self selecting group of individuals from politics, business, media, public life, and academia' and is detailed within a report jointly commissioned by the Reuters' Institute and Editorial Intelligence. The report, written by John Lloyd and Julia Hobsbawm is well worth reading, and is available here. Sadly I missed the launch event for unavoidable reasons, but Guido was scathing about the comments aimed at bloggers by some on the platform.

Green planning bill passed by MPs : ePolitix.com - News

A bill which would allow councils to impose higher energy efficiency standards on new buildings has been approved by MPs.

Anti-repossessions plan unveiled : ePolitix.com - News

With repossessions rising, housing minister Caroline Flint has unveiled a plan to prevent the trend.

NHS Review : ePolitix.com - Policy Consultations

ePolitix.com Stakeholders comment on the news that health minister, Lord Darzi, has published the interim report of his NHS review.

UK Minister admits majority in favour of independence...! : SNP Tactical Voting

Yes, David Cairns, the Scotland Minister, has quite clearly stated that greater than 50% of Scots want independence:

"51% of people want independence but only 32% are going to vote for the party associated with independence," Mr Cairns told BBC Radio Scotland.

This line is from 2nd November 2006 and came at a time when Labour were attacking the SNP on its Holyrood capabilities. The line, now used in a wider context, blows a hole in the oft-quoted argument that if Scotland wanted independence then the SNP would have won a clear majority at Holyrood.

Infact, for the past 10 years at least we have seen independence support hover around the 45-55% mark. Given that this excludes the "don't knows" of approximately 10%, I would fully expect a referendum in 2008, 2009 or 2010 to end with a win for the "yes" campaign

So it begs the question, if back in 2006 the Nationalists can attract 51% of support for independence with only 32% of the Holyrood poll and with Labour still having some fight in them back then under Tony Blair and Jack McConnell, just what can the mighty SNP do with 45% support at Holyrood and Labour in clear disarray?

I really hope Salmond is strongly considering including a refendum bill in his draft legislation for next week.

Maybe 'It's Time' for the SNP to call the Labour bluff and have the referendum sooner rather than later after all?

Many have said that David Cameron will be the last Prime Minister of the UK, but I'm going to stick my neck out and and say not only will it be Tessa Jowell, but that we Scots have participated in our last UK General Election.

STEVENSON SUPPORTS CALL FOR FAIR PLAY ON EXCISE DUTY FOR WORKING OFF ROAD VEHICLES : Stewart Stevenson - Working for You

"Lamh marbh SF ag tachtadh na Gaeilge Ã³ thuaidhÂ" : Slugger O'Toole

Níl áthas mór ag Concubhar Ó Liatháin. Tá sé ag argóint gur "Sinn Féin, an páirtí is glórtha ar son na teanga ó thuaidh ar feadh na mblianta, go fóill ag labhairt go poiblí ar son na Gaeilge. Ach ní fios céard atá ionadaithe an pháirtí timpeall bord an Rialtais ag rá." Cuireann sé ceist, cad ar dhein SF. Agus tagann an freagra go soiléir, "faic éifeachtach"! Nó mar a cuir Máirtin i bhfocail é, "ignored by the powers-that-be".

Hillary Clinton: a genuine talent : aidan maconachy

Hillary Clinton missed her real vocation - acting. She's a natural.

In the early going before the Democratic campaign became seriously competitive we were treated to the patrician-in-waiting. She looked almost like American royalty putting in time before her coronation. She said everything short of "I am the Democratic nominee - period."

The condescending, even elitist side of Hillary came through as her campaign kicked into gear. We were told that Obama lacked experience, that his judgment and patriotism were suspect. There were even doubts cast about his personal integrity.

To Clinton's growing alarm, the upstart who had the temerity to go toe-to-toe with her began to steal the ground from under her feet. You could see on TV how badly she was stung. Her pride was wounded.

When Obama dropped the "bitter" comments about white working class voters who "cling to guns or religion", Hillary seized the opportunity. Annie Oakley kicked in. With her back to the wall, Hillary grabbed the nearest flag and became the pumped up patriot. The toney senator morphed into a gritty woman with a raspy voice, eager to rub shoulders with the folks and down a couple of shots. She informed us that her parents were regular church goin' folk and that she had been a gun user from way back.

Next up was Hillary Uberbush. On ABC she shocked even hard bitten Republican hawks by saying that if Iran targeted Israel - she would hit the button and "totally obliterate" Iran. Talk about taking it to the limit and beyond. That was a statement designed to shock America awake. It was meant to bring those Americans on-side who still had lingering doubts about her toughness and willingness to follow through. Thing is ... who was the woman who said that? She bore little resemblance to the Hillary Clinton who appeared on MSNBC last October with Brian Williams and stated a preference for a diplomatic approach to Iran.

Americans are shrewd when it comes to political gamesmanship. Sure they are patriotic, most of them, but they don't fall too easily for obvious lures. A percentage of Democrats were taken in by Hillary's patriotic show and her bravado, many of of them white women of a certain age. But a larger percentage of voters didn't buy it, as the results from North Carolina and Indiana demonstrated - not because Americans questioned her patriotism, but because they questioned her motivation. The bandwagon effect she hoped would turn the race around, was out of gas before it even got rolling.

She looks set to win West Virginia and Kentucky. The demographics work in her favor. White working men have been voting for Clinton in higher numbers. But even with both states the math still won't add up on her side of the ledger.

Gabor Steingart's recent article explores the saga of the "two Hillarys" in "The End of the Clinton Era":

"The longer the campaign went on, the more these two Hillarys diverged from one another. One was a great lady, the other nothing less than a great fighter. She pulled out all the stops, resorting to everything, including self denial."

David and Mayor Bloomberg : Conservative Party News from Conservatives.com

Mayor Bloomberg joined David Cameron on a visit to an ARK Academy in London on Friday morning.

Labour's failure to tackle family poverty : Conservative Party News from Conservatives.com

A new report from the Department for Work and Pensions has highlighted Labour's failure to tackle persistent poverty among families.

Appearing to be tough on crime, appearing to be tough on the causes of crime : Holyrood Chronicles

'New approach' needed to cut waste : ePolitix.com - News

Financial incentives would do more to increase recycling rates than "pay-as-you-throw" bin charges, according to a new report.

Tories attack 'progressive' teaching : ePolitix.com - News

The Conservatives have said that generations of children have been let down by "progressive" education policies.

Minister sets out NHS reform plans : ePolitix.com - News

The government has moved to calm fears about an overhaul of NHS health provision.

Devolution and the partial democratic deficitâ¦ : Slugger O'Toole

According to one senior journalist the former Iron Chancellor looked like a ghost in Belfast yesterday. Such are the dangers of full blown democracy. Gordon Brown got a good old fashioned kicking at the polls last week. A kicking that has put his adminstration on a two year notice. Despite its critics, our half blown version has certainly tied our political parties to some useful work. Despite the rush to judgement in some parts of the media it is likely to take another two years before we find out whether this year's work is up to scratch... Whatever happens, mandatory coalition means we can't deprive any of the main parties of their ministerial salaries... More over at Comment is Free...

Slugger talks to Deaglan de BrÃ©adÃºn : Slugger O'Toole

In the run up to the Belfast launch of his book ‘The Far Side of Revenge', we'll be talking to Deaglan de Bréadún about the peace process, the last year of (finally) settled devolution, and the prospects for Northern Ireland in the future. Tune in at 10.30 when we kick off a half hour of informal chat.

Lost Things I Would Like Back : perspective

David Cameron: We are the champions of progressive ideals : Conservative Party Articles from Conservatives.com

Independent

Labour slumps to record poll low : ePolitix.com - News

Labour has recorded its worst rating since polling began according to a YouGov survey for the Sun.

Conservatives 26 points in front... : Westmonster

The latest Yougov poll claims that the Conservatives now have a 26 point lead. UK Polling Report. The government is set to help home owners as repossessions are set to rise. BBC. Channel 4. There are plans to start a national database of 'bad employees' which can be accessed nationally by all employers. BBC. Boris Johnson will today meet and swap notes with Michael Bloomberg, the Mayor of New York City. Channel 4. USNEWS. Japan has paved the way for the military defense use of space . Reuters.Read more...

Harnessing Solar Power Like Nature Intended : Stephen's Linlithgow Journal

NY Times: Tories' "Conservative Revival" : Westmonster

Upper-case 'C' Conservatives in Britain know all too well what it feels like to need a revival — 'twas only a short eight months ago that Labour looked ready to re-up for another five years of fun. But now all that's changed, and beaten-down American lower-case 'c' conservatives are starting to take notice of Mr Cameron's Tory resurrection.

In today's New York Times, op-ed columnist David Brooks points to the Tories' "socio-centric" platform as a roadmap back to relevancy for the rudderless post-Bush US conservative movement.

"The flow of ideas has changed direction. It used to be that American conservatives shaped British political thinking. Now the influence is going the other way."

ANY CLERICAL JOBS GOING AT HEATHROW TERMINAL 5 ? : CALEDONIAN COMMENT

Once again we feature Mr Abu Qatada . This radical Islamic "cleric", once described as Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe, was yesterday quite incredibly released from custody by a UK appeal court . He's earmarked for deportation to Jordan, but as usual the "human rights" bleeding hearts seem more worried about the possibility of Abu being tortured by his fellow Muslims back home than they are about the prospect of him radicalising young Muslims in the UK . So from here on in this useless piece of hate-filled trash, apparently immune from deportation, will be laughing all the way to the bank, claiming thousands of pounds in social benefits for himself and his extended family from the same "Infidels" he claims to despise . Has nobody in our government got the guts to just order Abu to be put on a plane and good sodding riddance ? Such action is long overdue, because quite frankly the vast majority of Brits couldn't give a toss about Abu being tortured in Jordan - they just want him and his ilk thrown out . And they're even more fed up with the outmoded and totally discredited politically correct view that it's OK for nutters like Abu to stand outside a mosque preaching race hate and jihad but as soon as a law abiding taxpayer objects to it they're branded as racist, marginalised and criminalised . Being concerned with your self-preservation doesn't make you a racist . Enough is enough - or will it take yet more suicide bombings before our inept politicians finally see some bloody sense ?

--------------------------------------------------------------

There's a very strange employment anomaly at the UK's airports . UK citizens working there have to undergo a full mandatory criminal record check before they're taken on - but foreign nationals who apply for such jobs are hired WITHOUT any such checks . Unbelievably, the New Labour government has actually tried to justify this situation by claiming that these crazy and inane arrangements "are under review" . Who the bloody hell's in charge of personnel policies at these airports ? Osama bin Laden ? Or maybe Abu Qatada's local Job Centre could arrange employment for him at Heathrow Terminal 5 - if he's available of course and not undertaking pastoral work at remote training camps in the Lake District - because being foreign he wouldn't need a criminal record check .

--------------------------------------------------------------

And it's just been announced that British Airways is removing beef from its in-flight menu on economy travel because it "might offend Hindu's" . Strange how offending thousands of passengers by delaying their flights and losing their baggage is OK but as soon as the spectre of upsetting some religious nutter is raised all the stops are pulled out . Actually they'd do us all a bigger favour if they withdrew the whole lot of their in-flight meals anyway .

--------------------------------------------------------------

And it's reported that the New Labour Party is in deep financial trouble, as it tries to put off the repayments of Â£10 million in loans it's due to pay back because it's skint . And they can't raise any more because the whole "cash for honours" scenario has been blown out of the water . All told, the party is nearly Â£20 million in debt . I wonder how long it will be now before Gormless Gordon Brown brings forward urgent proposals to introduce state funding for political parties, all "in the interests of democracy" of course ?

--------------------------------------------------------------
A new study by a religious think-tank has suggested that by the year 2035 there will be more practising Muslims ( 1.96 million ) in the UK than there will be practising Christians ( 1.63 million ) . And by 2050 the Christians could also be outnumbered by practising Hindus . But the most encouraging thing about these figures is that all these "practising" religious people will be vastly outnumbered by about 70 million who couldn't give a toss about religion - and that's a very healthy thing when you consider the intolerance, hatred, ignorance, doctrinal stupidity and bigotry that ALL these "practising" people encourage and in many cases practice . See above .

--------------------------------------------------------------

Building work will begin on the Olympic Stadium for London 2012 in two weeks time . Construction of the 80,000-seater stadium is reportedly "three months ahead of schedule and will cost Â£496 million" . What's the betting that by May 2010 it'll be 3 months behind schedule and it's costs will have risen to at least Â£700 million ? And if the fiasco that was the construction of the new Wembley stadium was anything to go by, this latest white elephant may not even be ready in 2012 !

--------------------------------------------------------------

Mr Vladimir Putin took over as Russian Prime Minister yesterday and made an immediate pledge to "overtake Britain as a leading economic power" . Good call, Vlad, because the way things are going even if Russia's economy stands still you'll soon be well ahead, because we're in reverse, Comrade - sorry, Mate .

: Malcolm Redfellow's World Service

There's not much the BBC website has to learn about building traffic.

Take for example the headline up today:

Great tits cope well with warming *

Inevitably, when one clicks through to the page, the story does not qualify for as much as a parental advisory sticker:

At least one of Britain's birds appears to be coping well as climate change alters the availability of a key food.

Researchers found that great tits are laying eggs earlier in the spring than they used to, keeping step with the earlier emergence of caterpillars.
Writing in the journal Science, they point out that the same birds in the Netherlands have not managed to adjust. Understanding why some species in some places are affected more than others by climatic shifts is vital, they say.

At this juncture, Malcolm wisely decides to avoid any comment about Dutch Birds, except to recall it is a fairly unremarkable pub, with a music room, up the Oldham Road in Failsworth, Manchester.

One can never be too careful with certain words in such a context, as for example:

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has banned the use of the word "cock" when applied to the male of the species, in case it causes offence.

An RSPB spokesman confirmed that it did not use the word 'cock' on its website
In a move condemned for "taking political correctness too far", a correspondent on an RSPB online forum was surprised to find that his use of the word "cock", when referring to a male blackbird, was replaced with four asterisks.

To which Malcolm can only add: "****!"

Long years ago, Malcolm worked alongside a lovely, if slightly too-innocent-for-her-own-good teacher. She insisted on using Ian Serraillier's 1956 great story, The Silver Sword, as a class reader. (It may subsequently have been edited or re-written: it certainly seems to have gained a new title, Escape from Warsaw). The problem was that one of the characters has a pet chicken, and this (as Malcolm painfully remembers) provokes the immortal line:

Jan placed his cock on the table.

As soon as the set of books was removed from the stock-cupboard,Malcolm, would take great care monitoring the class's progress in reading the story. He fully appreciated that he would be summoned to suppress the minor riot when the psychological moment arrived.

As for Malcolm stooping so far
as to employ a provocative head-line
with a cheap word-play on "tits",
in the hope of attracting cheap trade,

perish the thought.

______________________________________________

* Curiously, after a while, the headline changed to:
Great tits in Britain seem to be adapting to global warming
Now, what happened there?

Boris' Welsh Voice-peace : Miserable Old Fart

I am dumbfounded. Ian Dale reports that a few months after leaving the Beeb for a job with communications company Fleishman Hillard Guto Harri has resigned, in order to become Boris Johnson's Director of Communications.

Apparently Guto and Boris were mates in Oxford University.

Pum Punt? : Miserable Old Fart

Amongst the organisations that Heritage Minister Rhodri Glyn Thomas intends to bring under the Welsh Language Act are the Bank of England, about time too!

Services provided under the Act tend to be those that are most visible, signage, official documents etc. The most visible service provided by the Bank of England is issuing bank notes. Will including the bank under the terms of the act result in issuing bilingual bank notes. I do hope so!

Love Music Love Racism : UK Commentators

From the East London Advertiser, via reader Jockney :

"A gang of 20 youths attacked four Asian youngsters outside Victoria Park's Love Music Hate Racism carnival last month, leaving them needing hospital treatment. As they left the festival ground, the group was set upon by the gang of between 15 and 20 white and black youths around 6.30 pm on Sunday, April 27"

They don't seem to have quite got the hang of this "Black and White Unite and Fight" business, do they ? I wonder if they're the same crowd that were such a sign of progress for Simon Price ?

(also another attack on the clergy in Tower Hamlets)

Septimius Severus : Westminster Wisdom

"The contemporaries of Severus, in the enjoyment of the peace and glory of his reign, forgave the cruelties by which it had been introduced. Posterity, who experienced the fatal results of his maxims and example, justly considered him as the principle author of the decline of the Roman Empire"
Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire

Gibbon's perception of Septimius Severus was based on his own view of Roman history- he wrote a great longitudinal study of Rome's fall, from the age of the Antonines to the age of the Florentines and in his survey he noted the chronological passing of power. For Gibbon and for many before and after him, Rome's history took an upward turn in the second century AD. The hereditary Julio-Claudian and Flavian dynasties with their dynastic freaks (Tiberius, Nero, Domitian) gave way to the meritocratic series of adopted emperors- Nerva (96-8), Trajan (98-117), Hadrian (117-38), Antoninus Pius (138-61) and Marcus Aurelius (161-80). After Aurelius though the Empire slipped back- Aurelius's son Commodus was awful and he was succeeded by a period of civil war (193-97), only brought to an end when Septimius Severus seized control and reigned for a period of years until 211. After Septimius there was chaos as well- as challengers for the empire rose and fell and in the end internal chaos led to external danger- with emperors dying on foreign frontiers and various parts of the empire splitting off. The only Emperor who seemed to survive for a great period of time amidst the chaos was Severus, and hence Gibbon blamed him for the later decline.

Severus's biographer Anthony Birley takes a more lateral approach than Gibbon and stresses the ways in which Severus was a creature of his times. Severus was born in Lepcis Magna to a family with strong links to Rome- as part of the Empire's evolution more and more provincial citizens were using power within Rome itself- the great Senatorial aristocracy had been wiped out in the 1st Century AD and was replaced by a new aristocracy from the provinces, particularly Africa. Severus's ancestors- his grandfather in particular- was part of this and probably knew great literary figures such as Tacitus and Pliny. Severus's reign though marked a new turning point: he was the first Emperor not to have been brought up in Rome. He felt no great affection for the city- spending only three years of his reign in Italy (possibly less) and spending most of his time out on campaign. In that sense he marked the beggining of an evolution from an Italian Roman principate- to one which resided at key points on the frontier- as with Diocletian at Nicomedia and Milan, or with Constantine's successors at Constantinople and Ravenna.

Severus himself was part of a rich civilisation. He was a contemporary of Galen, the great doctor, and Tertullian, the Christian saint. Aurelius of course was not merely an Emperor but a philosopher. Severus was lucky in his historian, Cassius Dio, who compiled a pretty extensive history of his reign upon which much of Birley's work is based. But within that civilisation there were debates about strategy- some beleived as with Hadrian in an empire which withdrew to and solidified its boundaries, some like Trajan and Aurelius believed in extending the imperial sway to conquer new territories. Severus stood in the second camp- he looked in particular to Marcus Aurelius as a model for his reign- attempting to extend the Roman empire's sway in the East, where he sought to add Mesopotamian territory to reinforce the exposed province of Syria, in the south he forced the Roman border in Africa further south towards the Garamantes and in Britain, he attempted the conquest of Scotland but died before he could accomplish it. Such advances needed reorganisation. Severus was one of the leaders of a military reorganisation- that again was going to be paralleled later. The early Roman emperors relied upon provincial armies and a small Praetorian Guard in the Capital- Severus called up three legions to become a mobile reserve and attempted to introduce more fluidity into the army. Using it as a fluid weapon of offence and response instead of a passive defensive force- that meant that he spent far more upon the military than his predecessors. The instability of 193-7 also forced him to raise the soldiers' pay at a rate which the sterner predecessors would never have done.

Returning to Gibbon's question then- because it is worth answering, why did these trends lead to a temporary collapse and did they contribute to the decline and fall of the Roman Empire? Lets instead of answering Gibbon, answer a different question- did Severan reforms lead in part to the problems of the third century? To that question I think we can answer an unambiguous yes- the Severan reforms led to massive inflation throughout the empire, they led to military instability with soldiers desiring increased pay and receiving it from every new contender, Severus and his predecessors contributed to smashing up the old Roman system and the replacement was painful. But equally whilst Severan reforms contributed to the mid third century collapse, they also contributed to the recovery in the late third century. It is no accident that Diocletian and his successors used Severan ideas to reanimate the Empire: the Roman Empire in these years could in part be seen as a society going through the shock of reorganisation- and going through it spectacularly because the symptoms of that shock were civil war and invasion. Severan reforms though- introducing the itinerant, provincial, non-Roman Emperor with a mobile force behind him- shaped the later Roman Empire. Those reforms went back into the reigns of Aurelius and beyond- but they formed the template of what the Empire looked like under Constantine.

Perhaps what this demonstrates is that whereas there was definitely a fall of the Roman Empire in the West- decline isn't always the best way of conveying what happened to Rome. Rome evolved from a Republic to a Principate, from a Principate to an Empire- the changes meant that the form of the state changed- at times those changes could be painful but often they were attempts to respond to actual situations. Of course there were important failures- as you would expect with any system that relied on one individual, selected at times by the random chance of their genes, and Rome seemed to specialise in competent fathers with useless sons (Severus's son Caracalla didn't survive that long after murdering his brother) but there were strategical changes as well- some of which we see in Severus's reign. Severus's change of strategic focus is interesting because it demonstrates the increasing foreignness of Rome from what it had been- and it demonstrates the way that the Empire evolved to meet new challenges- tougher enemies on the frontiers (especially in the East with the rise of Sassanid Persia) and the need to rule by consent in the provinces, and coopt local elites. Severus afterall probably spoke with a Carthaginian accent- (he might well have pronounced his own name Sheptimus Sheverus) Carthage three hundred years before his birth, had been Rome's great rival.

Severus's reign therefore is fascinating- Gibbon was right, though other reigns built towards it, it was a watershed. But 'decline' is the wrong image, rather we should think of a Severan transition- whereby under Marcus and Severus the Empire's nature changed and the old Rome slowly ebbed away to be replaced (after the shock of the mid-third century) with something very different, the empire of Diocletian and Constantine.

Odd one out : Love and Garbage

Which is the odd one out?

Soapstar Superstar
Ant and Dec's Saturday Night Takeaway
Ant and Dec's Gameshow Marathon
The British Comedy Awards
A Year with the Queen

Answers

Well, in Soapstar superstar phone in votes on premium rate lines were ignored in favour of decisions from the production team made effectively in advance of the calls; in Takeaway calls on premium rates were ignored if the caller lived outwith a certain radius from the production team; in the Gameshow Marathon a short list of potential winners was drawn up from a locale based on how "lively" a caller sounded rendering many calls (on premium rate lines) ineffective; in the British Comedy Awards viewers were invited to call in (on premium rate lines) to determine the winner of an audience vote during a segment recorded prior to broadcast where the award had been given before broadcast (oh, and

"Ant and Dec's Saturday Night Takeaway was wrongly announced as the winner of the People's Choice Award. The correct winner was The Catherine Tate Show which, at the time of announcement of the winner, had attracted the most votes.
"In addition to the People's Choice Award there were a series of awards determined by a jury. Robbie Williams was invited to present an award. It was understood that he would be happy to present an award if the recipients were Anthony McPartlin and Declan Donnelly. In order to ensure his attendance, this assurance was given albeit at a time when the winners of all the jury awards had been decided and Anthony McPartlin and Declan Donnelly had not been selected. As such it was an assurance that could not legitimately have been guaranteed as the only award still to be decided was the People's Choice Award, the winner of which was then unknown and dependant upon the public vote. " ). IN each case where money was obtained from gullible members of the public by nefarious means, some might say by deception, no-one resigned.

However, in "A Year with the Queen" a trailer edited by an independent production company appeared to show the Queen storming out of a photoshoot, when she was actually being grumpy on the way in. No-one died, and no-one was defrauded. BUt the controller of BBC1 resigned, and hence " A YEar with the Queen" is the odd one out.

For more see the ever excellent septicisle.

Burma : Cllr Fraser Macpherson - LibDem Councillor for Dundee's West End - www.dundeewestend.com

As raised by Nicol Stephen in the Scottish Parliament today, the Cyclone Nargis disaster is a tragedy for the people of Burma.

Already suffering from the lowest living standards in Asia and years of misrule and mismanagement, the people of Burma have now been struck by this terrible natural catastrophe.

Our differences with the Burmese regime are well known, but our most urgent task now is humanitarian. The latest figures report more than 22 000 dead, probably many more.

As of today Aung San Suu Kyi has been detained for a total of 12 years and 197 days. Please click on the headline and help the people of Burma.

Sinderins Court Update : Cllr Fraser Macpherson - LibDem Councillor for Dundee's West End - www.dundeewestend.com

As reported in tonight's "Evening Telegraph", I am pleased to learn from Home Scotland that the residents' lift in Sinderins Court that has broken down some 17 times recently, has been repaired and has been working normally over the past few days.

Residents had contacted me following the breakdowns, expressing concern about the broken lift. Although I am pleased that the lift appeared to be back operating again this week, I sought assurances from Home Scotland that a permanent solution to the regular lift breakdowns was found.

Home Scotland has now replied saying :

"I can advise that the lift is now working and has been for quite a few days. However, it has been agreed that the lift is approaching the end of its serviceable life. We are planning to replace the control panel and hydraulic unit and this work is going out to tender.

"Unfortunately, once the above work proceeds, it will be necessary to put the lift out of commission and this could take a maximum of two weeks. We appreciate this will be a great disruption to the residents and we will try to keep the period the lift is not available to a minimum. You will appreciate however, that in the long term this work will benefit all the residents.

"Once we are aware of when the work is likely to go ahead and have a clearer indication of the timescale, we will contact all the tenants."

It is obvious that replacing the lift's control panel and hydraulic unit is vital if further breakdowns are to be avoided, but I am anxious that any further work is carried out as quickly as possible and any disruption minimised. I am in discussion with Home Scotland regarding this.

The Times and Michelle Obama : SNP Tactical Voting

Reading tomorrow headlines in The Times has been an interesting affair.

The leanings of the newspaper aren't difficult to work out when it discusses "the noble cause of the union" and has ex-Communications Director for Scottish Labour writing about FMQs. And Kezia suggests that "Labour's big challenge is somehow to fight for the media's affection"? Yeah right, tough fight you've got there Kez.

But no, it was another article that got under my skin. An appropriate line there given the article discusses Michelle Obama and leads with the title "You go girl!". Barack Obama's wife and quite possibly the next First Lady of America reduced to a cheap Jerry Springer chant.

Even if the truly awful Sun or Daily Record had chosen such a title I would be surprised but The Times?

I am genuinely stunned.

: Malcolm Redfellow's World Service

There's not much the BBC website has to learn about building traffic.

Take for example the headline up today:

Great tits cope well with warming

Inevitably, when one clicks through to the page, the story does not qualify for as much as a parental advisory sticker:

At least one of Britain's birds appears to be coping well as climate change alters the availability of a key food.

Researchers found that great tits are laying eggs earlier in the spring than they used to, keeping step with the earlier emergence of caterpillars.
Writing in the journal Science, they point out that the same birds in the Netherlands have not managed to adjust. Understanding why some species in some places are affected more than others by climatic shifts is vital, they say.

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has banned the use of the word "cock" when applied to the male of the species, in case it causes offence.

An RSPB spokesman confirmed that it did not use the word 'cock' on its website
In a move condemned for "taking political correctness too far", a correspondent on an RSPB online forum was surprised to find that his use of the word "cock", when referring to a male blackbird, was replaced with four asterisks.

Jan placed his cock on the table.

perish the thought.

Labour government by reclassifying Cannabis panders to the most reactionary elements within the media and US government. : ORGANIZED RAGE

The Labour government by reclassifying Cannabis panders to the most reactionary elements within the UK media and US government.

by Mick Hall.

Just how bankrupt of ideas New Labour has become was demonstrated yesterday when the over promoted Home Secretary Jackie Smith, reclassified Cannabis back to a class B drug. Such cowardly and harmful behavior has been par for the course throughout the New Labour governments period in office. For whenever they have come under the lash of the right wing media due to a societal problem they have always use administrative means to appease their reactionary media critics, whilst refusing to confront the core of the problem.

The UK already has some of the harshest laws within the EU against the possession and supply of illegal drugs, yet far from reducing the number of people who take recreational drugs these laws have become part of the problem. Our jails are full to bursting due to these draconian drug laws and thousands of young people are having their lives ruined, not by the drugs and narcotics they experiment with, but due to the governments infantile over reaction.

Rather than looking at the overall picture as people like Professor Colin Blakemore are calling for, the government looks to PC plod and the law to solve the problems of illegal drug use. Which is farcical as history has proved draconian laws have very little affect on the numbers of people taking hard and soft drugs. Indeed Pro Blackmore, the former head of the Medical Research Council, said that cannabis use had fallen since 2004 when the law was liberalized and Cannabis was downgraded to a class C drug; and restoring the drug to class B status would be unlikely to protect those people who were most vulnerable, [such as those with a psychiatric illness] but it would increase their chance of getting a criminal record. He went on to say, "The confusion over cannabis highlights the need for a proper overhaul of the present classification system, which the public neither understands or respects." *

Drug-Scope, the leading drugs information charity, said in a statement that it was disappointed the government had ignored the ACMD's advice: "Unfortunately, the message given by this decision is that drugs policy can be driven as much by political considerations, media headlines and scare stories as by the evidence."

Even the government's own scientific advisers last night warned the Home Secretary, that her decision to upgrade the legal status of cannabis would not work in curbing its widespread abuse. Professor Sir Michael Rawlins, chair of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), said moving cannabis from class C to class B "is neither warranted, nor will it achieve its desired effect."

The ACMD, the government's own expert body on drugs, decided by 20 votes to three to recommend that cannabis remain a class C drug. Its nine-month review concluded that while more potent, homegrown strains of herbal cannabis, such as skunk, now dominate the British market, the evidence of a substantial link with mental illness remains weak.
Rawlins said that the government had the right to consider other factors but warned that reclassification would make little difference to the levels of consumption: "We know that for people who smoke cannabis, it makes no difference to them whether it is class A, B or C. What is important is a really vigorous public health response."

About the only figure to welcome the reclassification decision was the Tory shadow home secretary, right winger David Davis, which just about says it all, as it is clear Ms Smith and the New Labour government is pandering to the worse of the reactionary media and conservative right wing bigots like Mr Davies. That these New Labour politicians still believe there are votes in cracking down on those who take recreational drugs just shows how little they understand about the constituency they are pledged to serve.

Again the Brown Government is using a societal problem to introduce laws that can and will be mainly aimed at working class people. Once again it will be the working classes and their children who will feel the backlash from this reclassification. Instead of turning the pockets out of working class youngsters and raiding small time inner city dealers, the police should turn their attention to the drug use within the City of London and within public corporations like the BBC. Drug use is allegedly rife in the dealing rooms of the cities major banks and the newsrooms of the mainstream media, but no suggestion of compulsory drug test there, despite the importance to the nation of what goes on in these organizations. Such test are reserved for the underclass that inhabit our prisons or the pupils who attend sink schools

Of course what is really needed is some innovative thinking as far as illegal drugs are concerned, but this is unlikely to happen for two reasons. Firstly neither the Labour Government or Conservative opposition would consider going beyond the strict guidelines set by the US government for its allies as far our drug laws and drug treatment methods are concerned. Secondly far to many influential middle class professionals gain a very good living out of the illegality of recreational drugs and it also allows governments and the home office to have a handy bogeyman about the place when it comes to justifying larger budgets for the police, military and security services.

Conditions.. and investments - Redux : Slugger O'Toole

Mick mentioned the Hearts and Minds interview with New York City Comptroller, William Thompson. He opens by futuring on the Investment Conference, but his position on the MacBride principles [3min 40s in] and the Emerald Fund are worth comparing to his previously stated position - noted here. Whereas he had said, of projects selected by the Emerald Fund, "I think that they understand that we are still committed to the MacBride Principles and I think that they’ll make that clear to anybody they’re going to do business with", he is now stating that, whilst companies the NY Pensions Funds have stocks in will continue to apply the MacBride principles, projects selected by the Emerald Fund will rely on the application of the, "very strong", "laws that are in place."

Specifically the response from Karen Gillon (Labour MSP) is worth noting.

In short, it seems if Labour MSPs don't like the questions being asked they'll put your address on some sort of hit-list.

Imagine Cathy Jamieson and Frank McAveety coming round to bash your head in for asking if they thought Local Income Tax was a good idea? Terrifying!

So yeah, in case any Labour MSPs are reading this and want to do me over. I live at the top of those dodgy Craigmillar Towers and answer to the name of Bruiser McGhee. Feel free to pay me a visit any time you like Kazza....

Tories surge to record lead : UK Polling Report

A new YouGov poll for the Sun tomorrow has topline figures, with changes from their last poll, of CON 49%(+5), LAB 23%(-3), LDEM 17%(nc). This is the first poll conducted wholly after both the local election results and Boris Johnson's victory in London, though Populus's poll was partially conducted after the mayoral results.

The 26 point lead is obviously in a different league to every poll that's gone before, on a uniform swing it would produce a Conservative majority of 272 (though obviously, in the vastly unlikely event that such a lead occured at a general election all bets would be off and who knows what freakish result would actually occur). It's the sort of lead that ICM - the only pollster whose figures from back in 1992-1997 are comparable to their figures today - was recording for the Labour party when the Conservative party was flat on the canvas back in 1995.

As ever, we need to be cautious about any poll that shows large shifts of support. This one is explicable - big election victories like the local elections last week often have a halo effect, the winner suddenly has the aura of victory about them, the loser the scent of defeat. Another good example are the polls from straight after the Lib Dem victory in the Brent East by-election back in 2003, when the aura of success about them briefly saw them leap to joint first place in the polls on 31%.

They soon fell back, and if that's what's going on here the Tories will fall back too; I personally find it hard to believe they'll stay at quite this level anyway. Alternatively, the local election defeat may have been the trigger for a real change in public attitudes towards Labour, confirming an image of them as past it and ready to be kicked out.

A third possibility of course, is that this is just a freak result. Remember Populus's poll earlier this week showed no such similar jump in the Tory lead. YouGov normally show the largest leads, so I doubt other companies will match the scale of this lead, but we'll have to see if they show the same trend towards even larger Conservative leads.

UPDATE: The Sun says this is the lowest Labour have ever sunk in the polls since records began. Is it? As far as I tell it equals their lowest rating ever. There was also a Gallup poll in December 1981 that put them on 23%.

The Fire of Scottish Nationalism : eurealist.co.uk

Telegraph article Now faced with the real possibility of going down in history as the myopic political movement that destroyed Britain from within, Labour in Scotland are running scared concerning... [[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

: Malcolm Redfellow's World Service

Malcolm's hatchet-jobs (at Malcolm Redfellow's Home Service and here) are puny compared to the axe-work of a master-craftsman.

So, today, he looked with envy at the Economist's obituary of Alfonzo LÃ³pez Trujillo, the "Vatican enforcer":

IN 1995, as head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, Cardinal Alfonso LÃ³pez Trujillo published a "Lexicon of Ambiguous and Debatable Terms". They included "safe sex" (no such thing, unless confined to the nuptial bed); "gender" (a construct of strident feminists) and "family planning" (code for abortion). He could also throw back a few phrases of his own: "contraceptive colonialism", "pan-sexualism", "new paganism" and, with a special lowering of those beetling black brows, "the culture of death".

And that's only the taster. Want more? --

The enemy was all around him. Legislators and governments across the first world who passed laws to ease divorce or ensure "gay rights" (though of course, to quote Aquinas, lex injusta non obligat). Fervently Catholic countries, like the Philippines, which adopted two-child policies to curb their surging populations. Scientists in white coats who committed murder in test tubes in the name of medical research.

But the big foe was Latex Johnnie:

Condoms were the first enemy. In their sly, shiny packets, they invaded the poor world as insidiously as the disease they were meant to prevent. To the cardinal, there was nothing safe about them. They merely encouraged promiscuity. To hope to stop AIDS by wearing one was like "playing Russian roulette". They were as full of tiny holes as a sieve, through which the HIV virus, "roughly 450 times smaller than the spermatozoon", as he told the BBC, would slither with no difficulty. The World Health Organisation might claim condoms were 90% effective; he had read it in the Guardian; but "they are wrong about that". And he was right.
He was always right, staunchly on the side of order, stability, hierarchy and God's law.

There's no mealy-mouthed nil nisi bonum here. The Economist knows how to pile on the ordure:

Latin America's crop of military dictators received no condemnation at the archbishop's hands. Where there was chaos, he reminded his bishops, people needed firm government.

This trick reminds Malcolm of Governor Teddy Roosevelt's axiom:

I have often been fond of the West African proverb: "speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.

Before moving on, let's note that on the facing page the Economist reviews a couple of books under the headline Sex and sensibilty, which concludes:

In Uganda people were warned of the risks of HIV and encouraged to use condoms and be sexually faithful. That helped reduce the impact of AIDS ... Political, religious and local leaders have done little elsewhere in Africa. Some, such as South Africa's president, Thabo Mbeki, preferred disseminating untruths about the disease and how it should be treated. Where strong leadership could have had the greatest impact its absence is most keenly felt.

Yes, the Economist also does irony with great effect.

The Economist is uncompromisingly and honourably liberal (in the economic, political, and social definition of that much-overused word). One does not have to take it in entirety as a modern Code of Hammurabi. It argues its case; and Malcolm invariably finds it stimulating both in its content, and its challenges to his own prejudices.

The Vatican, by comparison, needs to justify or publicly regret its long-time deplorable record, especially in South America.

It stood up for the dictator August Pinochet in his struggle to avoid deportation from Britain to Spain, when Spain wanted to investigate his role in the disappearance of Spanish nationals during his reign of terror from 1973 to 1990. The Argentine Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo criticised the Vatican's intervention on Pinochet's behalf, only for President Carlos Menem to apologise cravenly on their behalf for their presumptuous lÃ¨se majestÃ©.

It was curious, witnesses noticed, how the Catholic authorities throughout the Chilean and Argentinian pogroms never openly criticised, yet were too frequently able to report to the bereaved family what had befallen one of the "disappeared".

Malcolm reverts to Roosevelt's letter. It was an honourable stand, by a strong leader, against pressure from within his own Republican Party to re-appoint a corrupt official. He says of his opponents, what could be said of the Vatican, and the likes of Trujillo:

They have often shown themselves the enemies of good government, but in this case I do not think they are even to be credited with good intentions. They were no more anxious to see dishonesty rebuked than a professional prohibitionist is to see the liquor law decently administered.

In a murky world,
for the likes of the Economist
we should be grateful.

Hearts and Minds: reflecting on a year of devolutionâ¦ : Slugger O'Toole

Hearts and Minds will be talking to Professor Joe Lee looking at the progress of the local institutions a year after devolution arrived in what looks like a more durable form than previously. The Nolan Show started on a similar theme this morning, with good contributions from John Simpson, Bill Jeffries and Goretti Horgan (though it seemed to go slightly belly up after my own short piece). Also tonight, the NYC Comptroller seems to think MacBride principles won't be needed for new start companies here because of the Fair employment legislation is already in place, but it will still hold to for current US companies.

"not perfect and not wholly democratic.." : Slugger O'Toole

The press conference following the events in Belfast today, live-streamed online at the time, was very interesting viewing. The politicians' set-pieces are still online here. The BBC's Mark Devenport picks up on the potential problem with Gordon Brown's ‘pressie'

The Prime Minister did bring one pressie - telling the Executive they could keep the proceeds from sales of their assets to the tune of £2.2 billion. That's double the current figure. But is this an enormously generous gesture or an injunction to sell off the family silver at a time when the market price is rock bottom?

Executive sources are sceptical about whether they can get anywhere near the £2.2 billion figure. What was clear from Sir David Varney's recent report is that Belfast port is the big plum Whitehall believes can be plucked from the Executive's tree. But Stormont ministers are far from certain this would be such a good idea.

The online clip doesn't include the journalists' questions at the end.. nor the moment when, just after Taoiseach Brian Cowen had expressed confidence in a stablity provided for through the Belfast and St Andrews Agreements which bind future governments to the agreed arrangements, NI First Minister Ian Paisley wandered off the feel-good script somewhat. Describing the current administration at Stormont as "not perfect and not wholly democratic, but the best [he] could get for the people of Northern Ireland", Ian Paisley went on to express a desire to move towards more democratic structures sooner rather than later.. at which point the deputy First Minister intervened and called an end to the press conference citing other engagements for the political couple.

Place your bets : Heresy Corner

Over at Political Betting, Mike Smithson is tipping Tessa Jowell, of all people, as a possible replacement for Gordon Brown - assuming, of course, that the Labour Party manages to find a way to get rid of him. Is this the woman who could turn Labour's fortunes around? he asks.

What's needed is a different style and a different tone and a leader who comes over as being authentic and likeable. Absolutely central is to have someone who can communicate and has a high emotional intelligence. So what about a woman?

What indeed? After all, Harriet Harman has been such a huge success as deputy leader. And she's a woman, after all.

Smithson adds that Jowell "stands head and shoulders above everybody" - proof, if true, that the leading Labourites are all dwarves - and praises her performance on TV as the disastrous local election results rolled in. "There are few other politicians who could have coped so well and come over so effectively" he says. Having to pretend polite amusement at Jeremy Vine's embarrassing antics was certainly a challenge. But you have to ask what she was doing there in the first place. After all, Labour knew that they were going to lose, and lose heavily. The party managers would hardly have put up someone who had anything to lose.

"I think David Cameron would find her a very tricky adversary. She would enjoy an amazing media honeymoon when, dare I suggest, calling an election could be on the cards."

Ah yes, it would indeed be a honeymoon. For the media. They could have such fun with Jowell's husband, David Mills, who has been so helpful with Silvio Berlusconi's tax affairs, and the politically convenient "separation" that ensued. Or they could remind people of the amazing flexibility she showed over tobacco sponsorship of sporting events, arguing passionately for a ban until someone took her to one side and told her that Tony took a different view, thanks to Bernie Ecclestone's million. Then there's the supercasino, and the political manipulation of lottery funds, and Jowell's complete failure to control the budget for the 2012 Olympics...

It would be unmissable.

Mike Smithson has an enviable reputation for political soothsaying, and at 100/1 - at least before he tipped her - his suggestion should perhaps be looked at seriously. But it's not really credible, is it?

Tessa Jowell, it's true, has a reputation, among colleagues, for "niceness", which probably allowed her to keep her job at the height of the Berlusconi business when most journalists were predicting her demise. She wouldn't have clung on if she had been, say, Peter Mandelson. But "niceness" isn't the most looked-for quality in a potential leader. The more so when combined with the patronising Nannyspeak that New Labour has made its own, and of which much of the British public is now heartily sick. Would you vote for Mary Poppins?

Boris and Liberty? : Heresy Corner

As the dust settles on the local elections, new Tory administrations - above all in London - now have to set their stamp on the country. Will they really be any better? Will anything change? Or is it all just wishful thinking?

In an article entitled Will the Real Boris Please Stand Up, Brendan O'Neill argues that Boris Johnson "looks set to take London down a similar managerial, uninspiring path as Ken." The iconoclastic, former Marxist editor of Spiked, faced with the counter-intuitive spectacle of the entertainingly anarchic new mayor, comes out with a string of old-fashioned anti-Tory taunts. His analysis is nonsensical, as I hope to demonstrate. His roots are showing. But his conclusions may, nevertheless, hold true.

O'Neill's argument falls into two main parts. In the first, he points out, accurately enough, that Boris's actions have rarely if ever matched the libertarian, devil-may-care recklessness of his prose style. Insults have invariably been followed by contrition. Policy positions, even before his every move came to be overseen by Lynton Crosby, have been nuanced, even timid. Famously, for example, he once criticised Jamie Oliver's programme of school dinner reform, only to recant under fire:

Yet when he received a battering from the media - outraged that he had attacked 'decent' Jamie and 'his heroic battle against an uncaring, bureaucratic system' - Boris relented. In a half tongue-in-cheek, half saving-his-ass apology, he denied ever having criticised Jamie Oliver, and said he now realised that Jamie is a 'national saint, if not the Messiah.

Such willingness to kow-tow to the canons of political correctness, even as he rushes to offend the next one, should perhaps put a damper on expectations. Above all, Boris is now very keen indeed to be taken seriously, and being "serious", in the current thought-policed climate, tends to mean dutifully spouting whatever fashionable nonsense happens to have taken hold of the political-media establishment. And not doing anything too unexpected. To that extent, O'Neill may be right in saying that the new mayor is,

a very modern politician, one who, in the absence of core convictions, trades on his personality and celebrity instead. Boris is business as usual in British politics...

I would put it down to cowardice rather than shallowness, however. And if Boris does fail to destroy the Nanny State in London - as he almost certainly will - the fault will not be his. One man, however charismatic, cannot hope to prevail against a system so entrenched, and so jealous of its privileges, as the present pullulant bureaucracy. At most he can inspire, and with allies proceed by tiny steps to tie down the behemoth of regulation and control. It's too early to celebrate, that's for sure.

Where O'Neill goes seriously awry, and reveals his still-beating socialist heart, is in his assertion that Boris, and his leading Tory colleagues, don't actually care about liberty, and certainly don't have any coherent philosophy of freedom.

Boris's journey also reveals something far more important about the shallow, kneejerk nature of the contemporary right-wing critique of New Labour's 'nanny statism'. The reason why Boris and a coterie of like-minded Tories could pose as the 'defenders of freedom' in recent years is not because they are truly devoted to free thought, speech and to more choice in our daily lives, but because the left turned freedom into a dirty word, leaving it open to being co-opted by elements on the right.

In fact, beneath that attractively libertarian exterior, the inner Boris wears jackboots:

It was the British left's wholesale abandonment of the ideals of freedom and choice, in favour of championing state control of people's habits and dangerous desires, which allowed the Tory right cynically to claim the banner of freedom as their own. This is why Boris and Co. could only partially, and deeply unconvincingly, defend freedom - because they were freedom-lovers by default and for the narrow political purpose of bashing the Blairites and Brownites. ...Boris's emergence, after only a couple of days, as a killjoy, authoritarian mayor shows how flimsy is the Tory right's love of liberty, and how reactionary - in the true meaning of that word - is their anti-'nanny statism'.

Well, O'Neill is right about one thing: that the political left is the current home of authoritarianism, statism and "no fun". What puzzles me is that he imagines (as he apparently does) that it was ever any different. With the partial, anomalous exception of Roy Jenkins' time at the Home Office, left wingers in power have always, everywhere attempted to suppress liberty and police thought. Right-wing authoritarians, by contrast, have only constituted one strand of the conservative tradition.

There is, moreover, a very significant difference between authoritarianism from the right and the left. On the right, the message is usually one of "law and order" coupled with an appeal to traditional moral values. The authoritarian-minded Conservative looks to the authority of the family, the church, the school, the local magistrates and other local notables, and to the existing social structure. Such a person will want to get tough - sometimes very tough - on criminals, but only so that ordinary law-abiding people can be left in peace to make their own decisions and get on with their lives.

The left-wing authoritarian, on the other hand (often adopting the misleading designation "liberal") wants to "get tough" on everyone. Families, social networks, civic institutions, even individual thought-processes - all must be subordinated to the constant invigilation of the state. The state will tell you what to eat, when, and how much. The state will decide who private clubs can admit as members or employees, and what sort of lightbulbs one is allowed to buy. The state will intervene to prevent you doing anything dangerous, just in case you hurt yourself. Of course, the left-winger believes that the state is benign, and that people are being bossed about for their own good. But that only makes it worse. Left wingers, in short, love "the people" but distrust and despise ordinary men and women.

These facts should be obvious. Only the smug superiority of an old lefty can cling to the illusion that the Left ever stood for freedom in anything but empty rhetoric. And it is a profoundly dangerous smugness. It was Labour, not the Tories, who trashed centuries of hard-won civil liberties in this country. That they were able to do so, for an entire decade, with only muted opposition from left-leaning campaingers for civil liberties, only makes sense if you factor in the power of the myth of the "evil Tory". Many who should have known better kept their mouths shut out of the deep-seated and irrational belief that, however bad Labour was behaving "the Tories would be worse". But the Tories were in power for almost two decades, and they weren't worse. They actually rejected many of the policies, from ID cards to long periods of detention without trial, that Labour have implemented. But they got no thanks from civil liberties campaigners, for too long quiescent under Labour, who often acted as though Mrs Thatcher and her colleagues were reincarnated Nazis.

So no, Tory belief in individual freedom and historic civil liberties is not mere opportunism. It comes from deep-seated belief, just as left wing authoritarianism does. But that doesn't mean that Brendan O'Neill's wider point, that Boris's London will be surprisingly similar to Ken's, will turn out to be misplaced. Boris is, after all, a politician. And politicians, of whatever hue, have an almost infinite capacity to disappoint.

Lost-Benefit Analysis : NoBollocksPolitics

A Government initiative I endorse? Whatever next!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7387042.stm

A scheme to catch out benefit cheats by using lie-detection equipment to analyse their voices over the telephone made the papers today. Seven councils have trialled the system and savings are being claimed of hundreds of millions of pounds as a result. The Home Office has decided to roll out the programme around the country. The national saving could theoretically run to billions.

But there are naysayers afoot. The TUC claims that some honest claimants might be scared off making their legitimate claims for fear of being wrongly labeled as a fraud. The proponents of the scheme counter that anyone with nothing to hide has nothing to fear.

To be honest, I'm not completely oblivious to the 'trampling on civil liberties' claim. After all, it wouldn't be much of a step further for your insurance company to insist on a polygraph test when you claim for your lost camera, or your prospective employer to ask you to confirm all the points on your CV. Or even a politician to be asked if they truly believed in their policies! There is something vaguely '1984' about denying people the presumption of innocence.

But wasting taxpayers' money on neer-do-wells who take undeserved handouts without a qualm - that's just not on. So I find myself in favour of the scheme, despite an unease that Winston might glimpse something of the wretched Oceania in its quiet arrival.

I have never been afraid of the police, or the Inland Revenue, or even a parking attendant, because like the majority of people I can feel no guilt if I have committed no offence. So I hold with the view that legitimate claimants will not be deterred from claiming. On the other hand, the mere thought of being caught out might well put a stop to a good many would-be cheaters' attempts to get that to which they have no entitlement. A good publicity campaign, a few test cases with suitably strong penalties, and the word will be out that cheaters will be caught and punished. Might even save a few quid on actually having to buy the machines that way.

It would be great to live in a world where this sort of thing wasn't necessary, but practiality must reign. And in a country where every politician proclaims a desire to help the poorest in society, wouldn't it be good to think that those unspent millions could actually find their way to the truly deserving cases?

Now if we heard a few more plans to weed out the leeches from society then perhaps the Government mightn't be in quite the doldrums that it is.

Down and out on the campaign trail: It's all over for HRC : Parburypolitica

I put Hillary Clinton into google blog search earlier to see what bloggers think her chances are of winning the nomination and the answer is not much. The consensus is that she's toast for the nomination. Personally I don't this will be the end of HRC at all. She'd add real strength to the ticket [...]

Green is the new black gold : Parburypolitica

Energy independence is a debate that is much more well formed on the other side of the Atlantic. I think this has a lot to do with the significantly higher numbers of casualties that the Americans have sustained in Iraq which is widely perceived to be a war in which oil has played a central [...]

You couldn't make it up... unless you work for the Evening Standard : Parburypolitica

Frankly if someone told me that Andrew Gilligan was if the pay of the Iranian government I would have a hard time believing them but apparently he is according to Sunny at Liberal Conspiracy. So with one Boris operative on the payroll of a state that according to the US state department is "the most [...]

Crucial Crewe : Parburypolitica

To help in Crewe, contact the Labour Party office on 01270 589 135, or you can send a cheque to "Crewe & Nantwich Labour Party", 171-173 Nantwich Road, Crewe, CW2 6DF. If you do send a cheque, please do include in your cover note a statement saying "I am a registered elector in the UK" together [...]

Steps to Armageddon : Parburypolitica

Arms control wonk has a great graph that summarises the debate about terrorists and nuclear weapons. Basically the consensus view if that if terrorist get hold of nukes they will use them and that is a view that I share. The implications of that are significant in foreign policy terms because the international community is going [...]

The Hypocrisy of Paul Staines : Parburypolitica

When I commented to Guido Fawkes's story about Lee Jasper I thought that he might let it through comment moderation after all the amount of depraved, mindless and venal comments that he does let through I don't see why he should stop a comment pointing out his utter hypocrisy.But no. Perhaps he was to busy [...]

Opening up : BBC NEWS | Nick Robinson's Newslog

Listen very hard, and believe me you did have to listen very hard, and you could just catch the sound of a new improved Gordon Brown today. The prime minister took to the sofa of ITV's This Morning programme to...

Brownspeak made simple : BBC NEWS | Nick Robinson's Newslog

Translation: "Bring it on" eg as used by Wendy Alexander with regard to a Scottish referendum on independence). Early translation (circa last weekend): "Let's get on with it as soon as possible." Later translation (circa today, source - G Brown):...

An almighty mess : BBC NEWS | Nick Robinson's Newslog

The other morning on the Today programme I was asked a question which, I can now confess, I didn't know the answer to. Had Gordon Brown been told of the switch by Wendy Alexander - the leader of the Scottish...

UkPoliBlog: Composite feed

Book Review: Marx's Das Kapital: A Biography, by Frances Wheen : ORGANIZED RAGE

The Senior Retainer, Mr Salmond And Ms Alexander Are Discussing The Future Of The Union With The Levity Of Children Arguing Over A Game Of Conkers. : Kirk Elder, Senior Citizen from Peebles

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor and the danger, yes he said danger, of reason : Vowles the Green in Knowle

MP's Allowances : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

Would every other leader do worse? : UK Polling Report

Alcohol may be banned nationally... : Westmonster

Ironman versus Batman : Gavin's Blog

Darth Vader cafeteria : Gavin's Blog

Working hard at Bulmers : Gavin's Blog

Un-Enlightenment - redux : Slugger O'Toole

Post Office Closures Slammed - Brake : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

'Drug Report has it wrong' says Weston-super-Mare MP : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

GOVERNMENT VOWS TO CUT MAGISTRATES' SENTENCING POWERS : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

Police Authority Meets Ministers to Discuss Capping : ePolitix.com - MP Press Releases

Rain Colbert dance off : Gavin's Blog

Brassneck: 10th most influential blog in Britainâ¦ : Slugger O'Toole

Green planning bill passed by MPs : ePolitix.com - News

Anti-repossessions plan unveiled : ePolitix.com - News

NHS Review : ePolitix.com - Policy Consultations

UK Minister admits majority in favour of independence...! : SNP Tactical Voting

STEVENSON SUPPORTS CALL FOR FAIR PLAY ON EXCISE DUTY FOR WORKING OFF ROAD VEHICLES : Stewart Stevenson - Working for You

"Lamh marbh SF ag tachtadh na Gaeilge Ã³ thuaidhÂ " : Slugger O'Toole

Hillary Clinton: a genuine talent : aidan maconachy

David and Mayor Bloomberg : Conservative Party News from Conservatives.com

Labour's failure to tackle family poverty : Conservative Party News from Conservatives.com

Appearing to be tough on crime, appearing to be tough on the causes of crime : Holyrood Chronicles

'New approach' needed to cut waste : ePolitix.com - News

Tories attack 'progressive' teaching : ePolitix.com - News

Minister sets out NHS reform plans : ePolitix.com - News

Devolution and the partial democratic deficitâ¦ : Slugger O'Toole

Slugger talks to Deaglan de BrÃ©adÃºn : Slugger O'Toole

Lost Things I Would Like Back : perspective

David Cameron: We are the champions of progressive ideals : Conservative Party Articles from Conservatives.com

Labour slumps to record poll low : ePolitix.com - News

Conservatives 26 points in front... : Westmonster

Harnessing Solar Power Like Nature Intended : Stephen's Linlithgow Journal

NY Times: Tories' "Conservative Revival" : Westmonster

ANY CLERICAL JOBS GOING AT HEATHROW TERMINAL 5 ? : CALEDONIAN COMMENT

: Malcolm Redfellow's World Service

Boris' Welsh Voice-peace : Miserable Old Fart

Pum Punt? : Miserable Old Fart

Love Music Love Racism : UK Commentators

Septimius Severus : Westminster Wisdom

Odd one out : Love and Garbage

Burma : Cllr Fraser Macpherson - LibDem Councillor for Dundee's West End - www.dundeewestend.com

Sinderins Court Update : Cllr Fraser Macpherson - LibDem Councillor for Dundee's West End - www.dundeewestend.com

The Times and Michelle Obama : SNP Tactical Voting

: Malcolm Redfellow's World Service

Labour government by reclassifying Cannabis panders to the most reactionary elements within the media and US government. : ORGANIZED RAGE

Conditions.. and investments - Redux : Slugger O'Toole

Popular stories : SNP Tactical Voting

Labour thuggery? : SNP Tactical Voting

Tories surge to record lead : UK Polling Report

The Fire of Scottish Nationalism : eurealist.co.uk

: Malcolm Redfellow's World Service

Hearts and Minds: reflecting on a year of devolutionâ¦ : Slugger O'Toole

"not perfect and not wholly democratic.." : Slugger O'Toole

Place your bets : Heresy Corner

Boris and Liberty? : Heresy Corner

Lost-Benefit Analysis : NoBollocksPolitics

Down and out on the campaign trail: It's all over for HRC : Parburypolitica

Green is the new black gold : Parburypolitica

You couldn't make it up... unless you work for the Evening Standard : Parburypolitica

Crucial Crewe : Parburypolitica

Steps to Armageddon : Parburypolitica

The Hypocrisy of Paul Staines : Parburypolitica

Opening up : BBC NEWS | Nick Robinson's Newslog

Brownspeak made simple : BBC NEWS | Nick Robinson's Newslog

An almighty mess : BBC NEWS | Nick Robinson's Newslog

Brassneck: 10th most influential blog in Britainâ¦ : Slugger O'Toole

"Lamh marbh SF ag tachtadh na Gaeilge Ã³ thuaidhÂ" : Slugger O'Toole

Devolution and the partial democratic deficitâ¦ : Slugger O'Toole

Hearts and Minds: reflecting on a year of devolutionâ¦ : Slugger O'Toole