Very valid analysis which supports the theory that the political class only exists to keep itself in power, On the same track, the Civil Service now mainly exists to protect its own jobs and privileges and much of the money spent on the health service is diverted to middle management striving to prove that managers managing managers is a productive process.
Yes Walton. Whenever you suggest cutting the size of the state that is always disingenuously taken as a call to cut ‘front line’ services for vulnerable groups etc. I have said before, if the state cannot do everything it needs for 37% of GDP-it’s simply trying to do too much.
Aha, you went there and invoked the name Trump! And others as always very eloquently.
The meaning of the word democracy, like the word woman, has been appropriated.
The powers that be have not been trying to save democracy, as we all formerly understood the word, they want something very different and cleverly use a word respected by many.
It is past time that we all point and shout - the emperor wears no clothes! The emperor of course being that creepy nazi-like, Bond villain, cult leader of the elites Klaus Schwab.
You will own nothing, be happy and eat bugs leader of the once free world. If you have any doubt he is a cult leader just give a cursory glance at Bill Gates or Justin Trudeau or Gavin Newsom. I don’t include Biden only because we all know someone else is behind that curtain.
Trump was like a bull in a China store. He called out the corruption of the government and elites. They have exposed themselves in their witch-hunt. He often said they were coming after us not only him. He is right about that.
Biden has said recently something to the effect that it doesn’t matter he has the big guns, implying the military against his own country! That is a damn shame to Americans.
The British king once thought that as well.
As well as the Americans and Russians in Afghanistan.
Who knows how all this will end. I just hope life, liberty and the freedom to pursue happiness Trumps all.
Agreed Deidre. Their idea of what ‘democracy’ means is different from mine. It’s like freedom of speech. They suggest it can only apply to certain approved speech, which of course completely neuters the concept. Their version of ‘democracy’ is a four or five year pantomime, when we are allowed to vote for one of two almost identical technocrats-any candidate who deviates from that-from the right or left-Trump. Bernie. Meloni. RFK. Corbyn. Farage. Is reframed as a ‘threat’.
It's the selective use of judicial process that is, as you say, the problem. Bendy rules only favour those in power. Russell Brand seems to be another example of the spotlight of justice only swinging towards someone who is a political opponent of the establishment. Or Extinction Rebellion getting a free pass from the police when they obstruct the traffic. There are numerous examples. It used to be that the law was above politics and 'without fear or favour' but it has become so corrupt it feels hopeless. How do you fight corruption from within? I suppose this is how revolutions start.
Yes it’s selective Bettina. But I would suggest Extinction Rebellion is a better example than Brand. I’ve worked with him, as have many, many of my friends. And let’s just say, I was worried when people I really respect like Michael Shellenberger appeared on his show. Because there was always the danger that Brand’s reputation could be used to discredit their position. You already see it. In ‘Brand’s Army of Nutter Conspiracy Theorists’ narratives. (Always with the ‘army’) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/17/inside-brands-conspiracy-fuelled-fan-army/. Maybe he’s being targeted now for political reasons, but that doesn’t make the rest of it untrue. Not someone I would defend.
No, I agree absolutely but I also know that there are many who could probably be accused of much the same - the concept of the groupie and the proclivities of rock stars are well known. I suppose its why many famous people steer well clear of politics - they have too many skeletons in their closets and so they don't stick their heads above the parapet.
Sep 19, 2023·edited Sep 19, 2023Liked by Low Status Opinions
I'm no fan of Donald Trump either, mainly because I don't like mouthy ego-trippers full stop. But it has always struck me (another Englishman by the way) - ever since his surprise win in 2016 - that just maybe in some inchoate instinctive way, the 40% or so of Americans who voted for him in 2020 could see that he was just what Western liberalism needed. Because like our own Mrs Thatcher, whatever else he is, at least he's not an 'insider' of the group-thinking lefty liberal establishment that has now got a monopoly over every Western institution. And like Mrs T (and unlike every UK conservative) he won't back down and tango dance with the awful MSM.
American conservatives think things have gone crazy for them but it's much much worse in Britain. Any Farage-like non-establishment politician couldn't get 40% of the vote here - they'd be lucky to get 4%. That's how much of a grip the BBC London MSM has on things here. https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/mrs-thatcher-and-the-good-life
And one last thing: someone (can't remember who) has likened the MSM reaction to the Trump 2016 victory as like "Oh my GOD, there's a huge meteorite plunging towards America - it must be STOPPED at all costs and if democratic free-speech must be ditched meanwhile then so be it!!!" So in a sense, if he'd hadn't had this massive tsunami of anti-Trump establishment/media bias, he probably WOULD have won in 2020. Particularly since his administration (perhaps in spite of the man himself) was overall pretty successful.
Thanks Graham. I think I might have guessed you were English from your name…! I completely agree. And thanks for the link. I look forward to reading your article when I get a chance later.
I have just read your Thatcher piece Graham. I have commented over there. You described Thatcher as I imagine her. Full of energy and self conviction. I’d recommend your article to all my readers. Thanks again for bringing it to my attention.
You may remember, Graham, that my family left the USA after 25 years and we started making our plans on the day after Trump's election. I think you are mistaken* in your claim that "it's much much worse in Britain". I think American politics is now completely tribal and it's hard to find anyone who thinks about the issues beyond whether it was was proposed by Team Red or Team Blue. For all its faults, British politics is *about something* rather than just voting for your favourite colour.
On your specific claim that Farage couldn't get 40% of the vote here, I believe that Farage could win power here in exactly the way that Trump did over there: by hijacking a major party. Trump chose to hijack the Republican Party because they were the most wounded from the previous 10 years of madness. It's just an accident of fate that he chose to enter the ring when the Republicans were already on the ropes. He could have just as easily hijacked the Democrats if the wind had been from a different direction.
The Republicans were in a terrible state in 2008 and things went from bad to worse after that. There was no way that a mainstream Romney-alike or Bush-alike could have won a primary in 2016 and I make the same prediction for the Tories here in 2024. They are quite ready to be taken over by a charlatan or a demagogue.
* To be clear, I think the UK is messed up in all kinds of ways that make me very sad but on this one political issue, I think there is still hope for us.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one Ragged (as we cheerfully have before of course). I think the essence of Trump's hold on a large number of people is simply that he's a combative outsider who just refuses to play by the rules of what conservatives across the Western world increasingly see as a political stacked deck. I think that - for this reason - things will eventually turn ugly right across the West although I have no idea when. Britain is the worst in my view because its longstanding BBC-type leftist monoculture has strangled any significant conservative political constituency. (I was pleased to see you 'liked' my 'Thatcher and The Good Life' piece....that sets out my thinking pretty well. How are you by the way?
I think the success of "a combative outsider who just refuses to play by the rules" is a symptom of a diseased polity. It's certainly not the cure.
My narrative for the decline of the Republican Party over the last 20 years is that the most extreme elements of the base wanted to drag the party further and further to the right resulting more losses and more frustration. It was never going to result in the victories or the changes that they wanted. Choosing Trump as a saviour was a Burn It All Down act of despair. He was able to take advantage by telling lies to a lot of desperate people. He was never going to fix the problems that the base cared about.
I think something similar *could* happen over here but the only political topic that might energise enough people on the right of the Tory part is immigration. Unfortunately, the massive increase in immigration in the last few years is the result of Tory policies. It's hard to rebel against the establishment tories because they had largely been expelled from Tory leadership in the Brexit battles.
As I've said before, I don't think the Culture Wars have the salience that you think they have outside of a small number of older voters and, besides, I think the tide has turned on most of the cultural issues that bother you so much. I don't think a Starmer Government will be doing much to support Gender Self Id or reassigment, for example.
I'm still fit and healthy thank you, Graham. I had an MRI a few days ago and that's generated a cloud of scanxiety that won't dissipate until I get the results in a few weeks. I'll survive though!
You may have noticed that I have moved all my philosophy blogging to substack. I'm currently debating whether to add a political post to my portfolio. I have a lot to say!
Representative democracy only works when it represents - gives an effective voice to - a broad range of opinions that allow the losers of an election to feel they were given a fair hearing for their views. The current technocratic predilection for narrowing this to only those views held by a global, university educated elite is not democracy. If the only options on the ballot sheet are two to three representations of the same view, then the chances are that a significant minority or more commonly a majority no longer can feel their views are given that fair hearing and representation. Increasingly therefore the voting public will feel that they are, to quote Rainsborough, “not at all bound in a strict sense to that government that he hath not had a voice to put Himself under”. I fear the course of action our elites are pursuing.
Exactly. I very much share your fear. From what I can see, revolutions never achieve anything but making regular people miserable/dead and shuffling the pack of bosses at the top. No thanks.
I think I read somewhere that the NHS is the fifth largest non-military employer world-wide. Really? To look after the health of 66 million people in a country our size? Something seems out of scale here.
Yes Walton. But the mistake you make is to consider that the main purpose of the NHS is to look after the health of 66 million people, rather than what it actually is, which is to look after the health of the NHS.
Exceptionally well written, desparing stuff...as an older gentleman I feel every day, that the principles I absorbed throughout my younger life are being thrown away. The worst part is that these priciples were all empirical, Enlightenment based, with a bit of MLK thrown in. Very little makes sense, but hey, say our elites - we know our values don't hold water, but we don't care for you or about you, so GO AWAY.
Excellent analysis as always. I read a couple of the comments above and I know you commented on ‘revolutions’ in previous articles in that they invariably do not work; I still think that given the groundswell I can feel amongst the silent (and hugely) underrepresented) majority, one almighty kick back is coming and it’s going to be nasty. It might not work, and there are so many parties in play (East German right wingers to Khan hating diesel drivers) however it’s coming. At least it will take the heat away from rising inflation, the size of the State and failing Elites...... or is that the real agenda?! BTW - Rolf Harris ; it’s up there with Lizzo.
I don't know much about politics in Europe or Australia but I think your assessment of the judicial actions against President Trump is mistaken. I agree with you that the Colorado Supreme Court decision is misguided both legally and politically and that it's a bad look to be bringing political cases against your political opponents. But many of the umpteen Trump lawsuits is facing were brought by Republicans and he will likely be found guilty by Republican judges.
Our political system, like the American system, is grounded in a kind of assumption of goodwill and respectability and is easily commandeered by a charlatan. Trump was constrained by "the adults in the room" last time around and I think you underestimate how much damage a malevolent conman can do to a society when all the constraints are removed.
Separate complaint: You used several fringe ideas from the left to whatabout the crimes of a President who can do great damage to American democracy. While the left wing of the Democratic Party is full of looneys with lunatic ideas, the leadership does a fair job of keeping them out on the fringes where they belong. But the Republican Party have put a lunatic in charge. The precedents for giving the reins of power to a lunatic are not encouraging.
To complete my praise sandwich of your post though, I'll echo your suggestion that it's important that his opponents defeat him by fair, democratic means. I think American democracy will be on shaky ground if Trump wins but I don't think it will recover if the Democrats win by foul means. I think they could easily win fairly if they find themselves a decent candidate.
A final thought: I think the fault-line in both the American and British systems is that the list of salient political issues has changed dramatically since 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell and before we all became globalists but the list of the top two parties is still the same and what's important to the parties is not what's important to the voters. The goals of our political parties are not aligned with the goals of the voters so the parties — both parties, both countries — have to gin-up bogus culture war issues as a distraction. Both countries would be dramatically more prepared to face the future if they got rid of their two incumbents and replaced them with new parties that better represent the concerns of the people. Maybe we'll see that happen over here if the Tories get wiped out in 2024. Maybe it will happen to the Republicans over there if the Dems win fair and square too. If it does, I think the break up of Labour and the Democrats will soon follow.
Very valid analysis which supports the theory that the political class only exists to keep itself in power, On the same track, the Civil Service now mainly exists to protect its own jobs and privileges and much of the money spent on the health service is diverted to middle management striving to prove that managers managing managers is a productive process.
Yes Walton. Whenever you suggest cutting the size of the state that is always disingenuously taken as a call to cut ‘front line’ services for vulnerable groups etc. I have said before, if the state cannot do everything it needs for 37% of GDP-it’s simply trying to do too much.
Aha, you went there and invoked the name Trump! And others as always very eloquently.
The meaning of the word democracy, like the word woman, has been appropriated.
The powers that be have not been trying to save democracy, as we all formerly understood the word, they want something very different and cleverly use a word respected by many.
It is past time that we all point and shout - the emperor wears no clothes! The emperor of course being that creepy nazi-like, Bond villain, cult leader of the elites Klaus Schwab.
You will own nothing, be happy and eat bugs leader of the once free world. If you have any doubt he is a cult leader just give a cursory glance at Bill Gates or Justin Trudeau or Gavin Newsom. I don’t include Biden only because we all know someone else is behind that curtain.
Trump was like a bull in a China store. He called out the corruption of the government and elites. They have exposed themselves in their witch-hunt. He often said they were coming after us not only him. He is right about that.
Biden has said recently something to the effect that it doesn’t matter he has the big guns, implying the military against his own country! That is a damn shame to Americans.
The British king once thought that as well.
As well as the Americans and Russians in Afghanistan.
Who knows how all this will end. I just hope life, liberty and the freedom to pursue happiness Trumps all.
Agreed Deidre. Their idea of what ‘democracy’ means is different from mine. It’s like freedom of speech. They suggest it can only apply to certain approved speech, which of course completely neuters the concept. Their version of ‘democracy’ is a four or five year pantomime, when we are allowed to vote for one of two almost identical technocrats-any candidate who deviates from that-from the right or left-Trump. Bernie. Meloni. RFK. Corbyn. Farage. Is reframed as a ‘threat’.
Here is a perfect example:
https://open.substack.com/pub/hollymathnerd/p/a-way-you-can-help-fight-the-insanity?r=v5t1x&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
It's the selective use of judicial process that is, as you say, the problem. Bendy rules only favour those in power. Russell Brand seems to be another example of the spotlight of justice only swinging towards someone who is a political opponent of the establishment. Or Extinction Rebellion getting a free pass from the police when they obstruct the traffic. There are numerous examples. It used to be that the law was above politics and 'without fear or favour' but it has become so corrupt it feels hopeless. How do you fight corruption from within? I suppose this is how revolutions start.
Yes it’s selective Bettina. But I would suggest Extinction Rebellion is a better example than Brand. I’ve worked with him, as have many, many of my friends. And let’s just say, I was worried when people I really respect like Michael Shellenberger appeared on his show. Because there was always the danger that Brand’s reputation could be used to discredit their position. You already see it. In ‘Brand’s Army of Nutter Conspiracy Theorists’ narratives. (Always with the ‘army’) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/17/inside-brands-conspiracy-fuelled-fan-army/. Maybe he’s being targeted now for political reasons, but that doesn’t make the rest of it untrue. Not someone I would defend.
No, I agree absolutely but I also know that there are many who could probably be accused of much the same - the concept of the groupie and the proclivities of rock stars are well known. I suppose its why many famous people steer well clear of politics - they have too many skeletons in their closets and so they don't stick their heads above the parapet.
Agreed.
I'm no fan of Donald Trump either, mainly because I don't like mouthy ego-trippers full stop. But it has always struck me (another Englishman by the way) - ever since his surprise win in 2016 - that just maybe in some inchoate instinctive way, the 40% or so of Americans who voted for him in 2020 could see that he was just what Western liberalism needed. Because like our own Mrs Thatcher, whatever else he is, at least he's not an 'insider' of the group-thinking lefty liberal establishment that has now got a monopoly over every Western institution. And like Mrs T (and unlike every UK conservative) he won't back down and tango dance with the awful MSM.
American conservatives think things have gone crazy for them but it's much much worse in Britain. Any Farage-like non-establishment politician couldn't get 40% of the vote here - they'd be lucky to get 4%. That's how much of a grip the BBC London MSM has on things here. https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/mrs-thatcher-and-the-good-life
And one last thing: someone (can't remember who) has likened the MSM reaction to the Trump 2016 victory as like "Oh my GOD, there's a huge meteorite plunging towards America - it must be STOPPED at all costs and if democratic free-speech must be ditched meanwhile then so be it!!!" So in a sense, if he'd hadn't had this massive tsunami of anti-Trump establishment/media bias, he probably WOULD have won in 2020. Particularly since his administration (perhaps in spite of the man himself) was overall pretty successful.
Thanks Graham. I think I might have guessed you were English from your name…! I completely agree. And thanks for the link. I look forward to reading your article when I get a chance later.
And it would be good to read, in due course, what you make of it.
I have just read your Thatcher piece Graham. I have commented over there. You described Thatcher as I imagine her. Full of energy and self conviction. I’d recommend your article to all my readers. Thanks again for bringing it to my attention.
That would be great. And thanks for subscribing....I've done the same. I think our Substack audiences will be broadly similar.
You may remember, Graham, that my family left the USA after 25 years and we started making our plans on the day after Trump's election. I think you are mistaken* in your claim that "it's much much worse in Britain". I think American politics is now completely tribal and it's hard to find anyone who thinks about the issues beyond whether it was was proposed by Team Red or Team Blue. For all its faults, British politics is *about something* rather than just voting for your favourite colour.
On your specific claim that Farage couldn't get 40% of the vote here, I believe that Farage could win power here in exactly the way that Trump did over there: by hijacking a major party. Trump chose to hijack the Republican Party because they were the most wounded from the previous 10 years of madness. It's just an accident of fate that he chose to enter the ring when the Republicans were already on the ropes. He could have just as easily hijacked the Democrats if the wind had been from a different direction.
The Republicans were in a terrible state in 2008 and things went from bad to worse after that. There was no way that a mainstream Romney-alike or Bush-alike could have won a primary in 2016 and I make the same prediction for the Tories here in 2024. They are quite ready to be taken over by a charlatan or a demagogue.
* To be clear, I think the UK is messed up in all kinds of ways that make me very sad but on this one political issue, I think there is still hope for us.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one Ragged (as we cheerfully have before of course). I think the essence of Trump's hold on a large number of people is simply that he's a combative outsider who just refuses to play by the rules of what conservatives across the Western world increasingly see as a political stacked deck. I think that - for this reason - things will eventually turn ugly right across the West although I have no idea when. Britain is the worst in my view because its longstanding BBC-type leftist monoculture has strangled any significant conservative political constituency. (I was pleased to see you 'liked' my 'Thatcher and The Good Life' piece....that sets out my thinking pretty well. How are you by the way?
I think the success of "a combative outsider who just refuses to play by the rules" is a symptom of a diseased polity. It's certainly not the cure.
My narrative for the decline of the Republican Party over the last 20 years is that the most extreme elements of the base wanted to drag the party further and further to the right resulting more losses and more frustration. It was never going to result in the victories or the changes that they wanted. Choosing Trump as a saviour was a Burn It All Down act of despair. He was able to take advantage by telling lies to a lot of desperate people. He was never going to fix the problems that the base cared about.
I think something similar *could* happen over here but the only political topic that might energise enough people on the right of the Tory part is immigration. Unfortunately, the massive increase in immigration in the last few years is the result of Tory policies. It's hard to rebel against the establishment tories because they had largely been expelled from Tory leadership in the Brexit battles.
As I've said before, I don't think the Culture Wars have the salience that you think they have outside of a small number of older voters and, besides, I think the tide has turned on most of the cultural issues that bother you so much. I don't think a Starmer Government will be doing much to support Gender Self Id or reassigment, for example.
I'm still fit and healthy thank you, Graham. I had an MRI a few days ago and that's generated a cloud of scanxiety that won't dissipate until I get the results in a few weeks. I'll survive though!
You may have noticed that I have moved all my philosophy blogging to substack. I'm currently debating whether to add a political post to my portfolio. I have a lot to say!
Go to it!
Representative democracy only works when it represents - gives an effective voice to - a broad range of opinions that allow the losers of an election to feel they were given a fair hearing for their views. The current technocratic predilection for narrowing this to only those views held by a global, university educated elite is not democracy. If the only options on the ballot sheet are two to three representations of the same view, then the chances are that a significant minority or more commonly a majority no longer can feel their views are given that fair hearing and representation. Increasingly therefore the voting public will feel that they are, to quote Rainsborough, “not at all bound in a strict sense to that government that he hath not had a voice to put Himself under”. I fear the course of action our elites are pursuing.
Exactly. I very much share your fear. From what I can see, revolutions never achieve anything but making regular people miserable/dead and shuffling the pack of bosses at the top. No thanks.
I think I read somewhere that the NHS is the fifth largest non-military employer world-wide. Really? To look after the health of 66 million people in a country our size? Something seems out of scale here.
Yes Walton. But the mistake you make is to consider that the main purpose of the NHS is to look after the health of 66 million people, rather than what it actually is, which is to look after the health of the NHS.
Exceptionally well written, desparing stuff...as an older gentleman I feel every day, that the principles I absorbed throughout my younger life are being thrown away. The worst part is that these priciples were all empirical, Enlightenment based, with a bit of MLK thrown in. Very little makes sense, but hey, say our elites - we know our values don't hold water, but we don't care for you or about you, so GO AWAY.
Excellent analysis as always. I read a couple of the comments above and I know you commented on ‘revolutions’ in previous articles in that they invariably do not work; I still think that given the groundswell I can feel amongst the silent (and hugely) underrepresented) majority, one almighty kick back is coming and it’s going to be nasty. It might not work, and there are so many parties in play (East German right wingers to Khan hating diesel drivers) however it’s coming. At least it will take the heat away from rising inflation, the size of the State and failing Elites...... or is that the real agenda?! BTW - Rolf Harris ; it’s up there with Lizzo.
If all else fails I would expect Trump will be unfortunate enough to fall off a balcony.
Perhaps if it all fails Trump will be unfortunate enough to fall off a balcony.
I don't know much about politics in Europe or Australia but I think your assessment of the judicial actions against President Trump is mistaken. I agree with you that the Colorado Supreme Court decision is misguided both legally and politically and that it's a bad look to be bringing political cases against your political opponents. But many of the umpteen Trump lawsuits is facing were brought by Republicans and he will likely be found guilty by Republican judges.
Our political system, like the American system, is grounded in a kind of assumption of goodwill and respectability and is easily commandeered by a charlatan. Trump was constrained by "the adults in the room" last time around and I think you underestimate how much damage a malevolent conman can do to a society when all the constraints are removed.
Separate complaint: You used several fringe ideas from the left to whatabout the crimes of a President who can do great damage to American democracy. While the left wing of the Democratic Party is full of looneys with lunatic ideas, the leadership does a fair job of keeping them out on the fringes where they belong. But the Republican Party have put a lunatic in charge. The precedents for giving the reins of power to a lunatic are not encouraging.
To complete my praise sandwich of your post though, I'll echo your suggestion that it's important that his opponents defeat him by fair, democratic means. I think American democracy will be on shaky ground if Trump wins but I don't think it will recover if the Democrats win by foul means. I think they could easily win fairly if they find themselves a decent candidate.
A final thought: I think the fault-line in both the American and British systems is that the list of salient political issues has changed dramatically since 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell and before we all became globalists but the list of the top two parties is still the same and what's important to the parties is not what's important to the voters. The goals of our political parties are not aligned with the goals of the voters so the parties — both parties, both countries — have to gin-up bogus culture war issues as a distraction. Both countries would be dramatically more prepared to face the future if they got rid of their two incumbents and replaced them with new parties that better represent the concerns of the people. Maybe we'll see that happen over here if the Tories get wiped out in 2024. Maybe it will happen to the Republicans over there if the Dems win fair and square too. If it does, I think the break up of Labour and the Democrats will soon follow.
Let's hope!