I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
The point of inflection will be when the poor of the world head to China to realise their dreams, risk life and limb on boats or clambering over mountains to make a new life there. And when Chinese demographics start to look positive again.
I was taken aback here in Georgia by a conversation with our taxi driver. He owns a sunflower seed factory. I asked how did he end up doing that. Bought it from his uncle, who sold up, headed to Mexico, illegally crossed the Rio Grande into the US and has lived there undocumented for several years as a taxi driver himself, now applying for a green card.
People are still drawn in by the American dream, including those like Georgians with visa free holiday travel to the EU. enough to run the gauntlet of people smugglers. As a result the US population pyramid is healthy while most of Eurasia is entering terminal demographic decline.
This is surely the one hope. Who actually would ever choose, of their own volition, to live in Russia, China, Iran or North Korea (God help us), if they had the alternative choice of a Western democracy. Anyone? Must count for something.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
The point of inflection will be when the poor of the world head to China to realise their dreams, risk life and limb on boats or clambering over mountains to make a new life there. And when Chinese demographics start to look positive again.
I was taken aback here in Georgia by a conversation with our taxi driver. He owns a sunflower seed factory. I asked how did he end up doing that. Bought it from his uncle, who sold up, headed to Mexico, illegally crossed the Rio Grande into the US and has lived there undocumented for several years as a taxi driver himself, now applying for a green card.
People are still drawn in by the American dream, including those like Georgians with visa free holiday travel to the EU. enough to run the gauntlet of people smugglers. As a result the US population pyramid is healthy while most of Eurasia is entering terminal demographic decline.
Other models are possible. China can be a hegemon without an equivalent "Chinese dream".
One person with some impressive longevity is Ed Miliband.
He gets a go with a Cabinet post at the failing end of a long period of Labour government as a young politician, has his shot at the top job after some surprising ruthlessness in not kowtowing to expectations of political primogeniture, fails, but is back at the top table of the LotO, and in line for a Cabinet post 14.5 years after his last one, still a relatively young man in political terms.
How many with previous Cabinet experience were there in the first Cameron ministry?
Hague (which was news to me) Clarke
And I think that's it.
In 1997 I think only Jack Cunningham and Margaret Beckett had even been junior ministers under Callaghan.
In 1964 the only former cabinet ministers were Wilson and Gordon Walker (outside Parliament).
So it's not that unusual.
Which is why Ed's longevity in relative terms is impressive - because it is unusual after long periods in opposition to still have senior people from before hanging around.
It's not easy to maintain a senior post and relevance over that amount of time - after all, Blair and Cameron were not even MPs when the party they displaced took power. Not will Keir have been.
Douglas Alexander is standing again, after a period out of parliament. He's a former cabinet minister, under Gordon Brown. Imagine he may end up in Starmer's cabinet.
Secretary of State for Scotland?
More likely Ian Murray, at least to start with. I don't think Alexander would go straight into cabinet in any event. But he wouldn't be re-entering politics if he wasn't ambitious for office.
A major screw-up by Keir Starmer. He went far too far and now the pendulum has turned decisively in favour of the downtrodden Palestinians he looks at best an opportunist or at worst a LABOUR leader who doesn't give a damn about the human rights of Palestinians.
It is darkly diverting watching progressive left wing pro-immigration Jews on TwiX now suddenly seeing the terrible downsides of multiculturalism
Very hard to see how this plays out
Why don't you just let rip with the anti muslim prejudice instead of dressing it up with these artful constructions?
Because I’m making a particular point which you are determined to misconstrue
Whatevs
'Multiculturalism doesn't work'
Isn't that it? Your particular point?
No. It isn’t
I mean we can continue your infantile discourse if you like, but I’m making a more sophisticated point
Jewish people of the left - previously progressive, pro immigration and pro multiculturalism - are suddenly realising these polices are a disaster for them
As they are a vocal and influential constituency within the left - in Britain and elsewhere - this will have a significant effect on our politics. I have Jewish friends who have made exactly this intellectual leap in the past week
You're saying some left wing jews now agree with you that multiculturalism isn't working esp with the muslims.
Yes that's very sophisticated but I'm getting it.
It was quite alarming walking to the tube in London last week, there was a protest outside the tube station where people were saying through megaphones 'from the river to the sea Palestine will be free' and 'support the militias', and all this was being tolerated by passers by (admittedly including myself) and the police. So basically denying Israel's right to exist and supporting terrorism.
So how are you going to feel in that situation if you are Jewish?
Just seen a video on Twitter of a Central Line tube driver leading a ‘Free Palestine’ chant as he was driving. Can’t believe it can be real, but it seems to be
If the Tories stood a One Nation Tory, capable of understanding Burke and the complexity of running a large country in a progressively Conservative manner, in every seat, they will still lose but would win when they do the same in 2028/9.
They’d need to find quite a few fresh faces, though, wouldn’t they.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
The point of inflection will be when the poor of the world head to China to realise their dreams, risk life and limb on boats or clambering over mountains to make a new life there. And when Chinese demographics start to look positive again.
I was taken aback here in Georgia by a conversation with our taxi driver. He owns a sunflower seed factory. I asked how did he end up doing that. Bought it from his uncle, who sold up, headed to Mexico, illegally crossed the Rio Grande into the US and has lived there undocumented for several years as a taxi driver himself, now applying for a green card.
People are still drawn in by the American dream, including those like Georgians with visa free holiday travel to the EU. enough to run the gauntlet of people smugglers. As a result the US population pyramid is healthy while most of Eurasia is entering terminal demographic decline.
Other models are possible. China can be a hegemon without an equivalent "Chinese dream".
It’s definitely true that people are not seeing China as the land of opportunity, in the same way as the US, Canada, Australia, or European countries. There’s Westeners with very specific skills who are making money there, but it’s not the same as for example immigration to the Gulf states.
A major screw-up by Keir Starmer. He went far too far and now the pendulum has turned decisively in favour of the downtrodden Palestinians he looks at best an opportunist or at worst a LABOUR leader who doesn't give a damn about the human rights of Palestinians.
BJO for once had it right.
It's perfectly possible to sympathise with the downtrodden Palestinians, whose situation has been and is desperate, and take a firm position in support of Israel defending itself against Hamas in the wake of mass atrocity.
There are certainly difficulties and complexities around specific actions and support for those, but the general position is not as impossible to square as extremist positions want.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
I don't see how you can be both pro-democracy and complaining of populism. Democracy and populism are not the same, obviously, but populism is a normal facet of democracy which quite naturally arises whenever political leaders become too detached from the concerns of a large segment of the electorate.
Not sure if discussed on here yesterday but report in The Times yesterday said Ministers have been warned about security risk of General Election at the same time as the US Presidential Election.
Quotes Whiehall source saying: "There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed."
Surely there is less risk if they have the GE coincidental with the 2024 Presidential as Russia/Ukraine/China/Israel/RNLI will have to spread their resources wider.
Could someone please take pity on my abysmal ignorance and explain what the RNLI is doing in the same list as Russia, Ukraine, China, Israel? Google only returns the Lifeboats people.
Good evening, everyone.
I assume he meant DPRK (North Korea) but that’s one hell of an autocorrect!
“Barring a miracle [of the Tories winning and forming another government], I can’t see Jeremy wanting to be in opposition under a new leader. And if he loses he will be the biggest scalp on election night. That is not a departure anyone would want. People in Surrey are saying he will not stand.”
Suggestions instead he will go to the Lords and combine that with a return to business
I don’t blame him. He’s done his bit for his party. Can you imagine the state of the Tories if he hadn’t stabilised the Treasury after Kwarteng?
A major screw-up by Keir Starmer. He went far too far and now the pendulum has turned decisively in favour of the downtrodden Palestinians he looks at best an opportunist or at worst a LABOUR leader who doesn't give a damn about the human rights of Palestinians.
BJO for once had it right.
Not convinced. Sir K needs centrist votes by the million. Many of them are unimpressed by the Hamas case and cause, make little noise about it, but they vote. I think he has got the difficult balance about right.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
The point of inflection will be when the poor of the world head to China to realise their dreams, risk life and limb on boats or clambering over mountains to make a new life there. And when Chinese demographics start to look positive again.
I was taken aback here in Georgia by a conversation with our taxi driver. He owns a sunflower seed factory. I asked how did he end up doing that. Bought it from his uncle, who sold up, headed to Mexico, illegally crossed the Rio Grande into the US and has lived there undocumented for several years as a taxi driver himself, now applying for a green card.
People are still drawn in by the American dream, including those like Georgians with visa free holiday travel to the EU. enough to run the gauntlet of people smugglers. As a result the US population pyramid is healthy while most of Eurasia is entering terminal demographic decline.
Yes I’m sure that’s right, and on balance of probabilities I can see more paths to China imploding than USA or Europe.
I do wonder how much the reality of undocumented life in USA matches the ‘American dream’ though. To match your anecdote with another, which is at best tangential to the point we’re discussing:
I lived in Ecuador for a year or so about 12 years back. One of my closest friends there had travelled illegally to UK, worked in London for five years and then had returned home to become an English teacher in his home town. He said that, once the excitement of being in UK had worn off, his life in London was harder and more culturally disjointed than at home.
Though it must be said his experience in the USA might have been different. Also, it must be said that his home town, Lola, is one of the most beautiful places on the planet. So perhaps he isn’t representative of anything much!
Not sure if discussed on here yesterday but report in The Times yesterday said Ministers have been warned about security risk of General Election at the same time as the US Presidential Election.
Quotes Whiehall source saying: "There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed."
Surely there is less risk if they have the GE coincidental with the 2024 Presidential as Russia/Ukraine/China/Israel/RNLI will have to spread their resources wider.
Could someone please take pity on my abysmal ignorance and explain what the RNLI is doing in the same list as Russia, Ukraine, China, Israel? Google only returns the Lifeboats people.
A major screw-up by Keir Starmer. He went far too far and now the pendulum has turned decisively in favour of the downtrodden Palestinians he looks at best an opportunist or at worst a LABOUR leader who doesn't give a damn about the human rights of Palestinians.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
The point of inflection will be when the poor of the world head to China to realise their dreams, risk life and limb on boats or clambering over mountains to make a new life there. And when Chinese demographics start to look positive again.
I was taken aback here in Georgia by a conversation with our taxi driver. He owns a sunflower seed factory. I asked how did he end up doing that. Bought it from his uncle, who sold up, headed to Mexico, illegally crossed the Rio Grande into the US and has lived there undocumented for several years as a taxi driver himself, now applying for a green card.
People are still drawn in by the American dream, including those like Georgians with visa free holiday travel to the EU. enough to run the gauntlet of people smugglers. As a result the US population pyramid is healthy while most of Eurasia is entering terminal demographic decline.
Other models are possible. China can be a hegemon without an equivalent "Chinese dream".
The rise of a lot of 'great powers' has previously been based on slavery, genocide, colonialism... Nothing is going to stop China following some variation of the same path.
In this context it is quite astounding how people in the west, particularly the anglosphere, go on and on about slavery, colonialism and genocide that took place many generations previously and was subsequently disowned and abolished, but has nothing to say about the modern day equivalent in China and other parts of the developing world. The same people who live in a society that is heavily indebted due to overconsumption yet want to spent vast amounts of money on 'reparations' to resolve historic grievances. It seems pretty likely to me that a society built on this type of introspection will just get wiped out. The header goes on about politicians reconnecting with voters... well the way I see it that is what Trump is doing, and that is why a lot of people vote for him - as an alternative to inevitable failure.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
We disagree on most things, but on this, totally agree.
@Alanbrooke That's a good article. And if memory serves not the first one you've wrote (see below). You usually write in bursts. Will there be another two following shortly?
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
The point of inflection will be when the poor of the world head to China to realise their dreams, risk life and limb on boats or clambering over mountains to make a new life there. And when Chinese demographics start to look positive again.
I was taken aback here in Georgia by a conversation with our taxi driver. He owns a sunflower seed factory. I asked how did he end up doing that. Bought it from his uncle, who sold up, headed to Mexico, illegally crossed the Rio Grande into the US and has lived there undocumented for several years as a taxi driver himself, now applying for a green card.
People are still drawn in by the American dream, including those like Georgians with visa free holiday travel to the EU. enough to run the gauntlet of people smugglers. As a result the US population pyramid is healthy while most of Eurasia is entering terminal demographic decline.
Yes I’m sure that’s right, and on balance of probabilities I can see more paths to China imploding than USA or Europe.
I do wonder how much the reality of undocumented life in USA matches the ‘American dream’ though. To match your anecdote with another, which is at best tangential to the point we’re discussing:
I lived in Ecuador for a year or so about 12 years back. One of my closest friends there had travelled illegally to UK, worked in London for five years and then had returned home to become an English teacher in his home town. He said that, once the excitement of being in UK had worn off, his life in London was harder and more culturally disjointed than at home.
Though it must be said his experience in the USA might have been different. Also, it must be said that his home town, Lola, is one of the most beautiful places on the planet. So perhaps he isn’t representative of anything much!
The disconnect he speaks of is common among immigrants. In most cases they come from a mono culture to a … multi culture.
There was some interesting research on how this affects people from various cultures. The Islamist retreat to the 14th cent in the face of their sisters wearing makeup and their best friend marrying “out” is a standard trope. There are others.
Some embrace what can see like chaos. Others hunger for the simplicity of one religion, one nation, one culture… hmmm could make a catchy slogan in the right language.
A major screw-up by Keir Starmer. He went far too far and now the pendulum has turned decisively in favour of the downtrodden Palestinians he looks at best an opportunist or at worst a LABOUR leader who doesn't give a damn about the human rights of Palestinians.
BJO for once had it right.
Classic Rogerdamus.
To lose 23 resigning Labour councillors looks like carelessness
@Alanbrooke That's a good article. And if memory serves not the first one you've wrote (see below). You usually write in bursts. Will there be another two following shortly?
One person with some impressive longevity is Ed Miliband.
He gets a go with a Cabinet post at the failing end of a long period of Labour government as a young politician, has his shot at the top job after some surprising ruthlessness in not kowtowing to expectations of political primogeniture, fails, but is back at the top table of the LotO, and in line for a Cabinet post 14.5 years after his last one, still a relatively young man in political terms.
How many with previous Cabinet experience were there in the first Cameron ministry?
Hague (which was news to me) Clarke
And I think that's it.
George Young as well, I think, he may have been permanent attending Dave's cabinet.
Yes, George Young was both Leader of the House and Chief Whip under Cameron having served as Transport Secretary under Major.
What’s really interesting are those individuals that populated the top ranks of Cameron’s ministry who all had government experience from the Major administration. From memory, the list included Fox, Gillan, Maude, Willetts, Fallon, McLoughlin and Strathclyde.
On multiculturalism: My forthright opinion is that whether it can work or not depends.
Two examples where it has worked: First, the Amish. They settled in Pennsylvania because the Quakers there were also pacifists. They might well have failed in New England (Puritans), Maryland (Catholics), or Virginia (Episcopalians). (Some of them helped my borther in Colorado build a house last year, and a Pennsylvania friend replace a roof this year.)
Second, the Irish, Italians, and Poles. It took time, but these three groups now generally get along in our big cities, and often intermarry. As in the first example, the groups shared many religious beliefs from the beginning.
And when the incoming groups have radically different beliefs? If they are willing to "convert", then it may work. Sometimes that conversion is literal; a few years ago I read about a group of refugees from the Middle East who, living in Germany, asked to be instructed in Lutheranism, so they could fit in.
(Fiji is an example of where multiculturalism has not worked; the immigrants from India and their descendants have not fit in well. There are many other such example.)
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
The point of inflection will be when the poor of the world head to China to realise their dreams, risk life and limb on boats or clambering over mountains to make a new life there. And when Chinese demographics start to look positive again.
I was taken aback here in Georgia by a conversation with our taxi driver. He owns a sunflower seed factory. I asked how did he end up doing that. Bought it from his uncle, who sold up, headed to Mexico, illegally crossed the Rio Grande into the US and has lived there undocumented for several years as a taxi driver himself, now applying for a green card.
People are still drawn in by the American dream, including those like Georgians with visa free holiday travel to the EU. enough to run the gauntlet of people smugglers. As a result the US population pyramid is healthy while most of Eurasia is entering terminal demographic decline.
Other models are possible. China can be a hegemon without an equivalent "Chinese dream".
The rise of a lot of 'great powers' has previously been based on slavery, genocide, colonialism... Nothing is going to stop China following some variation of the same path.
In this context it is quite astounding how people in the west, particularly the anglosphere, go on and on about slavery, colonialism and genocide that took place many generations previously and was subsequently disowned and abolished, but has nothing to say about the modern day equivalent in China and other parts of the developing world. The same people who live in a society that is heavily indebted due to overconsumption yet want to spent vast amounts of money on 'reparations' to resolve historic grievances. It seems pretty likely to me that a society built on this type of introspection will just get wiped out. The header goes on about politicians reconnecting with voters... well the way I see it that is what Trump is doing, and that is why a lot of people vote for him - as an alternative to inevitable failure.
A Ghanaian told me that China was impressive - it took a century to get to the level of resentment against the British Empire, that the Chinese Empire has managed in a decade or two. Not at the elite level, but at the level of the person in the street.
In a few years, populism about “taking back our country from China” will be a big movement in a few places.
A major screw-up by Keir Starmer. He went far too far and now the pendulum has turned decisively in favour of the downtrodden Palestinians he looks at best an opportunist or at worst a LABOUR leader who doesn't give a damn about the human rights of Palestinians.
BJO for once had it right.
Classic Rogerdamus.
To lose 23 resigning Labour councillors looks like carelessness
Given they resigned because Starmer isn’t racist enough for them, he’s better of rid in the eyes of millions of swing voters.
@Alanbrooke That's a good article. And if memory serves not the first one you've wrote (see below). You usually write in bursts. Will there be another two following shortly?
A major screw-up by Keir Starmer. He went far too far and now the pendulum has turned decisively in favour of the downtrodden Palestinians he looks at best an opportunist or at worst a LABOUR leader who doesn't give a damn about the human rights of Palestinians.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
A major screw-up by Keir Starmer. He went far too far and now the pendulum has turned decisively in favour of the downtrodden Palestinians he looks at best an opportunist or at worst a LABOUR leader who doesn't give a damn about the human rights of Palestinians.
BJO for once had it right.
Classic Rogerdamus.
To lose 23 resigning Labour councillors looks like carelessness
Given they resigned because Starmer isn’t racist enough for them, he’s better of rid in the eyes of millions of swing voters.
Yes. The next GE isn't between Israel and Hamas. From Labour's point of view it's between Labour and Conservative (hundreds of seats) and SNP (40ish seats).
In England not a soul is going to vote Tory because Sir K is pro Israel. In Scotland Labour present an alternative prospectus to the SNP which veers a bit Palestinian.
The Islamic vote, the broad left vote and the extreme anti-Israel vote is going nowhere else important in electoral terms. This election will be won from the centre, which is why currently Sir K is winning it.
What could they have against it? Is there some feature in the detail of the Bill I’m not seeing that justifies demurring? Based on the short title, I’d hope it would be a Bill capable of commanding 650 votes.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
What could they have against it? Is there some feature in the detail of the Bill I’m not seeing that justifies demurring? Based on the short title, I’d hope it would be a Bill capable of commanding 650 votes.
Certainly many socially conservative Conservative MPs will be ideologically opposed to banning conversion therapy for trans people for example pre potential surgery
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
Keeping him in his box would have been sufficient. The idea that the West gets to choose who runs other countries died with Vietnam.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
If postponed, we’d have ended up doing the same thing no more than five years later.
A major screw-up by Keir Starmer. He went far too far and now the pendulum has turned decisively in favour of the downtrodden Palestinians he looks at best an opportunist or at worst a LABOUR leader who doesn't give a damn about the human rights of Palestinians.
BJO for once had it right.
Classic Rogerdamus.
To lose 23 resigning Labour councillors looks like carelessness
Given they resigned because Starmer isn’t racist enough for them, he’s better of rid in the eyes of millions of swing voters.
Yes. The next GE isn't between Israel and Hamas. From Labour's point of view it's between Labour and Conservative (hundreds of seats) and SNP (40ish seats).
In England not a soul is going to vote Tory because Sir K is pro Israel. In Scotland Labour present an alternative prospectus to the SNP which veers a bit Palestinian.
The Islamic vote, the broad left vote and the extreme anti-Israel vote is going nowhere else important in electoral terms. This election will be won from the centre, which is why currently Sir K is winning it.
Interesting thought, but arguably a more serious conflict is between ScotLab and SKSLab.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
Perhaps not invading without a clearer mandate from the UN would have been the more moral decision, at least in consequentialist terms.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
Keeping him in his box would have been sufficient. The idea that the West gets to choose who runs other countries died with Vietnam.
Well Saddam was removed, so the West achieved its aim there unlike Vietnam
The flags in this photo are not those of ISIS. They are the ‘shahada’ which is a declaration of faith in Islam. ISIS flags may appear similar but are not the same. We have specialist officers with knowledge of flags working on this operation to assist with these assessments.
What could they have against it? Is there some feature in the detail of the Bill I’m not seeing that justifies demurring? Based on the short title, I’d hope it would be a Bill capable of commanding 650 votes.
Certainly many socially conservative Conservative MPs will be ideologically opposed to banning conversion therapy for trans people for example pre potential surgery
Oh so there is something in the detail? Once we bring young people struggling with whether they are trans into it, I might not call working with them on whether the feeling is “real” before they have a op they can’t reverse “conversation therapy”.
If that’s in scope then whether I support it all depends on the drafting - and note that I came in expecting universal support when I though it was a narrower Bill. Can’t we just ban the thing we surely all agree on (gay conversion therapy) and then move on from there?
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
He was left in power after being defeated in Gulf War 1.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
If postponed, we’d have ended up doing the same thing no more than five years later.
Why? There are brutal dictators all over the world be we don't feel the need to kill 200,000 people and spend $800bn a time to depose them.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
He was left in power after being defeated in Gulf War 1.
An error. We could have got away with marching on Baghdad the first time.
What could they have against it? Is there some feature in the detail of the Bill I’m not seeing that justifies demurring? Based on the short title, I’d hope it would be a Bill capable of commanding 650 votes.
Certainly many socially conservative Conservative MPs will be ideologically opposed to banning conversion therapy for trans people for example pre potential surgery
Oh so there is something in the detail? Once we bring young people struggling with whether they are trans into it, I might not call working with them on whether the feeling is “real” before they have a op they can’t reverse “conversation therapy”.
If that’s in scope then whether I support it all depends on the drafting - and note that I came in expecting universal support when I though it was a narrower Bill. Can’t we just ban the thing we surely all agree on (gay conversion therapy) and then move on from there?
I doubt there would even be 100% support for banning gay conversion therapy, certainly many of the DUP and a few very socially conservative Tory MPs like traditionalist Roman Catholic Edward Leigh or evangelicals like Danny Kruger would not support a ban
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
If postponed, we’d have ended up doing the same thing no more than five years later.
Why? There are brutal dictators all over the world be we don't feel the need to kill 200,000 people and spend $800bn a time to depose them.
I didn’t say anything about deposing him because he was a brutal dictator.
We’d have been back for more off the back of more weapons inspector shenanigans.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
Keeping him in his box would have been sufficient. The idea that the West gets to choose who runs other countries died with Vietnam.
Well Saddam was removed, so the West achieved its aim there unlike Vietnam
No, it lost billions and completely screwed up international relations for the next couple of decades. And fucked up the region. Not a great swap for getting rid of a middle ranking autocrat.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
It sure did. I was more thinking about a phrase used in the header: western hegemony. This is a good thing if it refers to liberal democracy but not if it refers to wealth and living standards. Of course how those 2 things are correlated (and linked to the size and use of military power) is an interesting question.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
He was left in power after being defeated in Gulf War 1.
And Thatcher wanted to go all the way to Baghdad but she was replaced midway through by Major who like Bush Snr was more wary
What could they have against it? Is there some feature in the detail of the Bill I’m not seeing that justifies demurring? Based on the short title, I’d hope it would be a Bill capable of commanding 650 votes.
Certainly many socially conservative Conservative MPs will be ideologically opposed to banning conversion therapy for trans people for example pre potential surgery
Oh so there is something in the detail? Once we bring young people struggling with whether they are trans into it, I might not call working with them on whether the feeling is “real” before they have a op they can’t reverse “conversation therapy”.
If that’s in scope then whether I support it all depends on the drafting - and note that I came in expecting universal support when I though it was a narrower Bill. Can’t we just ban the thing we surely all agree on (gay conversion therapy) and then move on from there?
BIB: I suggested that the last time it was long grassed. Nobody cared. People preferred complaining about trans to actually making gay people's lives better.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
He was left in power after being defeated in Gulf War 1.
An error. We could have got away with marching on Baghdad the first time.
Yes, and the post-Cold War hubris hadn't yet set in so it probably would have been handled much better.
What could they have against it? Is there some feature in the detail of the Bill I’m not seeing that justifies demurring? Based on the short title, I’d hope it would be a Bill capable of commanding 650 votes.
Certainly many socially conservative Conservative MPs will be ideologically opposed to banning conversion therapy for trans people for example pre potential surgery
Oh so there is something in the detail? Once we bring young people struggling with whether they are trans into it, I might not call working with them on whether the feeling is “real” before they have a op they can’t reverse “conversation therapy”.
If that’s in scope then whether I support it all depends on the drafting - and note that I came in expecting universal support when I though it was a narrower Bill. Can’t we just ban the thing we surely all agree on (gay conversion therapy) and then move on from there?
BIB: I suggested that the last time it was long grassed. Nobody cared. People preferred complaining about trans to actually making gay people's lives better.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
Keeping him in his box would have been sufficient. The idea that the West gets to choose who runs other countries died with Vietnam.
Well Saddam was removed, so the West achieved its aim there unlike Vietnam
No, it lost billions and completely screwed up international relations for the next couple of decades. And fucked up the region. Not a great swap for getting rid of a middle ranking autocrat.
On what basis? Al Qaeda were there even before the invasion, no other regime in the Middle East has changed since and Saddam would certainly be providing Putin with funds and arms to use against Ukraine now
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
I don't see how you can be both pro-democracy and complaining of populism. Democracy and populism are not the same, obviously, but populism is a normal facet of democracy which quite naturally arises whenever political leaders become too detached from the concerns of a large segment of the electorate.
Sorry, missed this.
Yes I see your point and I think reducing the disconnection between politicians and the population they serve is healthy, if sometimes a bit messy.
My fear is that the current round of populism is more than that - the fragmentation of political discourse and the power of segmented easy answers to tricky questions through eg targeted Facebook ads allows a populist to unwind the democratic process such that they can hold onto power even when their own disconnect with the people is as great as the politicians they displaced.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
If postponed, we’d have ended up doing the same thing no more than five years later.
Why? There are brutal dictators all over the world be we don't feel the need to kill 200,000 people and spend $800bn a time to depose them.
They hadn’t stuck the finger up to Daddy Bush though
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
If postponed, we’d have ended up doing the same thing no more than five years later.
Why? There are brutal dictators all over the world be we don't feel the need to kill 200,000 people and spend $800bn a time to depose them.
They hadn’t stuck the finger up to Daddy Bush though
Daddy Bush decided not to topple Saddam after defeating him in the Gulf War and liberating Kuwait, even though Thatcher wanted to (first and probably last time we had a UK PM who was right of a US Republican President)
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
If postponed, we’d have ended up doing the same thing no more than five years later.
Why? There are brutal dictators all over the world be we don't feel the need to kill 200,000 people and spend $800bn a time to depose them.
They hadn’t stuck the finger up to Daddy Bush though
I read that sentence and accidentally omitted the "to". It changed the meaning somewhat.
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
I wholeheartedly agree on the relative economic decline (obvs not absolute).
But we should not welcome the decline in western values (or at least the values the west professes to hold - hypocrisy is a real problem). This is what Alan is picking up on I think - he is absolutely correct that democracy has lost legitimacy and we urgently need to rebuild that legitimacy to be able to promote it worldwide.
Right now I can see why developing nations might pick a Chinese social model over a European or American one, and that’s a problem in my eyes.
There is of course the problem with 'a Chinese social model' that there is no way of knowing, once they have it, that they have picked it.
Democracy on our model, with all its flaws, is the only basic format known to logic and reason which is able to test out at all, though imperfectly, the claim that 'we in power are doing what the people want'.
Very much agree. When I say I can see why developing nations might pick such a model, I mean the leaders of those nations not the populace. I’m not advocating such a choice in the slightest.
Though, in my darker moments, watching Russian aggression, democratic implosion in USA and the rise of populism globally, I do vaguely wonder if things go really south in my lifetime, historians might look back on 21st century and see the Chinese model as the least worst option.
Obviously a Uighur, Tibetan or (probably) Taiwanese would vociferously disagree.
I don't see how you can be both pro-democracy and complaining of populism. Democracy and populism are not the same, obviously, but populism is a normal facet of democracy which quite naturally arises whenever political leaders become too detached from the concerns of a large segment of the electorate.
Sorry, missed this.
Yes I see your point and I think reducing the disconnection between politicians and the population they serve is healthy, if sometimes a bit messy.
My fear is that the current round of populism is more than that - the fragmentation of political discourse and the power of segmented easy answers to tricky questions through eg targeted Facebook ads allows a populist to unwind the democratic process such that they can hold onto power even when their own disconnect with the people is as great as the politicians they displaced.
But perhaps it has ever been thus.
Well perhaps the establishment politicians had been spending for too much time working for their donors, rather than their electorate? If they’re only in it for themselves, why shouldn’t they be voted out?
I agree about the increase in the African population but part of the problem there is violent Islam, which was surely a spin-off from the Iraq War.
I mean, I greatly enjoyed it at the time but Iraq 2 was surely the greatest strategic blunder of the last century. It was completely unnecessary and surely marks the start of the decline of the west.
The economic decline of the West relative to the rest of the world is to be welcomed imo. The opposite would be a scandal.
Iraq 2 contributed to economic decline, but that's really beside the point. We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
Yes because leaving Saddam Hussein in power, one of the most bloody dictators of the 20th century, would have been such a moral decision!
If postponed, we’d have ended up doing the same thing no more than five years later.
Why? There are brutal dictators all over the world be we don't feel the need to kill 200,000 people and spend $800bn a time to depose them.
They hadn’t stuck the finger up to Daddy Bush though
Daddy Bush decided not to topple Saddam after defeating him in the Gulf War and liberating Kuwait, even though Thatcher wanted to (first and probably last time we had a UK PM who was right of a US Republican President)
Yes, she was wrong about German reunification, too.
Comments
Now I’m going to have a nightmare about Jacob Rees-Mogg being the only surviving Tory MP…
BJO for once had it right.
Sir Gavin Williamson would also be in the mix.
100% true imo.
There are certainly difficulties and complexities around specific actions and support for those, but the general position is not as impossible to square as extremist positions want.
I do wonder how much the reality of undocumented life in USA matches the ‘American dream’ though. To match your anecdote with another, which is at best tangential to the point we’re discussing:
I lived in Ecuador for a year or so about 12 years back. One of my closest friends there had travelled illegally to UK, worked in London for five years and then had returned home to become an English teacher in his home town. He said that, once the excitement of being in UK had worn off, his life in London was harder and more culturally disjointed than at home.
Though it must be said his experience in the USA might have been different. Also, it must be said that his home town, Lola, is one of the most beautiful places on the planet. So perhaps he isn’t representative of anything much!
Edit: more than beaten to it!
..So the Manchester University radical was just hiding.
In this context it is quite astounding how people in the west, particularly the anglosphere, go on and on about slavery, colonialism and genocide that took place many generations previously and was subsequently disowned and abolished, but has nothing to say about the modern day equivalent in China and other parts of the developing world. The same people who live in a society that is heavily indebted due to overconsumption yet want to spent vast amounts of money on 'reparations' to resolve historic grievances. It seems pretty likely to me that a society built on this type of introspection will just get wiped out. The header goes on about politicians reconnecting with voters... well the way I see it that is what Trump is doing, and that is why a lot of people vote for him - as an alternative to inevitable failure.
That's a good article. And if memory serves not the first one you've wrote (see below). You usually write in bursts. Will there be another two following shortly?
October 2018
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/10/21/a-nation-once-again-part-1-the-economics/
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/10/21/a-nation-once-again-part-2-culture-and-politics/
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/10/22/a-nation-once-again-part-3-lessons-from-abroad/
February 2023
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/02/21/give-us-unity-but-not-just-yet/
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/02/22/theres-life-in-the-old-dog-yet/
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/02/23/one-year-on/
October 2023
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/10/21/braving-a-new-world/
There was some interesting research on how this affects people from various cultures. The Islamist retreat to the 14th cent in the face of their sisters wearing makeup and their best friend marrying “out” is a standard trope. There are others.
Some embrace what can see like chaos. Others hunger for the simplicity of one religion, one nation, one culture… hmmm could make a catchy slogan in the right language.
What’s really interesting are those individuals that populated the top ranks of Cameron’s ministry who all had government experience from the Major administration. From memory, the list included Fox, Gillan, Maude, Willetts, Fallon, McLoughlin and Strathclyde.
Two examples where it has worked: First, the Amish. They settled in Pennsylvania because the Quakers there were also pacifists. They might well have failed in New England (Puritans), Maryland (Catholics), or Virginia (Episcopalians). (Some of them helped my borther in Colorado build a house last year, and a Pennsylvania friend replace a roof this year.)
Second, the Irish, Italians, and Poles. It took time, but these three groups now generally get along in our big cities, and often intermarry. As in the first example, the groups shared many religious beliefs from the beginning.
And when the incoming groups have radically different beliefs? If they are willing to "convert", then it may work. Sometimes that conversion is literal; a few years ago I read about a group of refugees from the Middle East who, living in Germany, asked to be instructed in Lutheranism, so they could fit in.
(Fiji is an example of where multiculturalism has not worked; the immigrants from India and their descendants have not fit in well. There are many other such example.)
In a few years, populism about “taking back our country from China” will be a big movement in a few places.
Then again, why would that person wish the marchers well, rather than get off the train & go with them?
https://x.com/alexrubner/status/1715721468489695303?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
EXCL - Proposed law banning conversion therapy will be kicked into the long grass.
The Bill is not in the Kings Speech
Comes amid a growing Tory mutiny over controversial plan.
Over 40 Tory MPs are writing to the government opposing it
https://x.com/kateferguson4/status/1715797072782242020?s=20
https://x.com/owenjones84/status/1715775511488499961
Palestine and RMT member? Bingo!
We'd been struggling towards a principles based global order. Iraq fatally undermined what moral authority the U.S. and its allies had, and seriously divided western societies.
In England not a soul is going to vote Tory because Sir K is pro Israel. In Scotland Labour present an alternative prospectus to the SNP which veers a bit Palestinian.
The Islamic vote, the broad left vote and the extreme anti-Israel vote is going nowhere else important in electoral terms. This election will be won from the centre, which is why currently Sir K is winning it.
The idea that the West gets to choose who runs other countries died with Vietnam.
https://x.com/metpoliceuk/status/1715767952539103408
The flags in this photo are not those of ISIS. They are the ‘shahada’ which is a declaration of faith in Islam. ISIS flags may appear similar but are not the same. We have specialist officers with knowledge of flags working on this operation to assist with these assessments.
If that’s in scope then whether I support it all depends on the drafting - and note that I came in expecting universal support when I though it was a narrower Bill. Can’t we just ban the thing we surely all agree on (gay conversion therapy) and then move on from there?
We’d have been back for more off the back of more weapons inspector shenanigans.
Not a great swap for getting rid of a middle ranking autocrat.
Yes I see your point and I think reducing the disconnection between politicians and the population they serve is healthy, if sometimes a bit messy.
My fear is that the current round of populism is more than that - the fragmentation of political discourse and the power of segmented easy answers to tricky questions through eg targeted Facebook ads allows a populist to unwind the democratic process such that they can hold onto power even when their own disconnect with the people is as great as the politicians they displaced.
But perhaps it has ever been thus.
Best drop goal since Wilkinson in the 2003 final?