2021-08-19
Today's Daily Sceptic highlights an article by Dr James Alexander, who reviews the history of the Tory Party and proposes a way to relate it to the current corporate cronyism that masquerades as the Conservative Party to its somnolent voters.
Whilst I wouldn't necessarily agree with all aspects of his analysis (and I wasn't around in the 19th century so I can't vouch for the historical accuracy) I do think that the overall thrust of his argument is broadly valid - until he comes to "Court vs Country". These are I think not terms which in today's world have much currency - they hark back to past times no longer with us and to which most people do not relate.
So whilst he quite accurately notes:
"Johnson has presided over the establishment of an entirely technocratic politics of problem-and-solution which is, alas, not a politics at all, but the substitution of technique for politics"
he also quite fails to characterise the political divide as perhaps it needs today to be characterised - in terms that we can all understand - as the clash between the notion that individual liberty under a minimum of law is our guarantor of freedom and prosperity, and the countervailing notion that only by obedience to the "state" can equality and "social justice" be obtained.
The differing objectives are critical.
On the "right" stand those who support individual freedom and accept that by nature the world is an unfair place, but believe that by maximising everybody's opportunities and providing them the independence of thought and judgement to make the most of them, the best outcome for all may be progressed.
On the "left" stand those who support the supremacy of the state, arguing that only the state is in a position to legislate for equitable outcomes and "social justice" (with the unspoken and unproven assumptions that this is possible by ever closer regulation that will have no adverse impact upon opportunity and prosperity).
Of course, it's your judgement that counts.
