I’ve read this twice and think this analysis of Labour’s performance so far excellent. It will be interesting to see how Starmer copes with unscripted questions in the House of Commons after summer recess ends, because not every MP will accept his technocratic ideology and it might get quite heated!
Thanks for this. Yes - this is a good observation. Starmer revealed his true character in his irritable response when the audience laughed at his 'my father was a toolmaker' line during that TV interview during the election campaign. He has no sense of humour and he doesn't like his inflated sense of self-importance being punctured. This will also come out in the Commons.
There was an example of that 'heat' in the HoC ( yesterday?) when James Cleverly took Cooper Balls to task over her statement about the 'riots' following the murders in Southport. She said it was disgusting that people were being attacked because of the colour of their skin and the perpetrators would be dealt with promptly ( words to that effect), and Cleverly, on the subject of 2 tier policing, reminded her about Labour's stance on the BLM rioting protestors, and the police injured at the time. Her mouth pursed thinly and she shook her head!
It seems that the technocratic hydra ( of a government) is not bothered by perception, but only the deliverance of the state of things they purport must come to pass.
Perception is an important facet of governing because it is about sensing, being aware of what, eg, the mood of the nation is, or, eg, the impact of the behaviour of a PM or a Cabinet member, it is about listening and seeing what government policies 'sit well' with the electorate.
How many more instances of this paucity of perception will be raised in the Commons in the 4 to 5 long years ahead. It is not to say the Tory technocrats were perceptive!
It does seem to be the mark of technocracy....it is 'inanimate', it has its 'spreadsheets', it has its targets and outcomes, which appear to be delivered without regard to perception, or whether these outcomes are fair and just. Starmer has technocracy running through his veins....no humour, nor humanity, just 'purpose'.
I thought that this is a powerful article, full of insight.
My suggestion is that there is also another turmoil roiling at the heart of Starmer & Co, intensifying their emotions. Starmer may be Prime Minister but in his heart he is Head Prefect. He assumes the authority of the 'Masters' far away in the Staff Common Room. Therefore he cannot do anything else but follow their distant requirements. Net Zero is beloved not because it 'makes sense' but because the belief in it is required by those above him. The backtracking on Brexit is not because it 'makes sense' but because because the Masters in the Brussels Tea Room expect it. Free speech is being fiercely suppressed because the School Rules demand no speaking in the corridors. The 'older pupils' in the Upper Sixth have privileges (like the Winter fuel allowance) that he doesn't think they deserve.
Starmer's minionhood must rankle, especially when his 'support' depends upon the school administration (the Blob) and the rough boys and girls in the 'Left' house.
"People of astonishing intellectual narrowness and superficiality" - so true that it makes me become Basil Fawlty deranged that they nevertheless have free rein to wreck my country, with "ankle deep support" as you so aptly describe it.
The chess pieces which come to life in Alice through the Looking Glass are a perfect example of the Adam Smith reference - ‘arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chess–board’, he soon finds that the chess-pieces in fact have wills of their own, and resolutely refuse to stay put in the arrangement he sets out for them.
Correct. And I would refer readers to this excellent article in the Daily Sceptic, which notes how appallingly Starmer has reckoned the mood of the country; indeed, so badly that all he can do is double down.
Sir Keir Cromwell, who, if he could, would ban everything we do together for fun.
And the Basil Fawlty reference! I still remember rolling around on the floor laughing (pre rofl era) at that episode. It is only slightly on the caricature side of the real-life, awful technocratic authoritarians you discuss, but oh so close!
Fawlty Towers still funny, even funnier if you can find the unexpurgated versions. Monty Python, not so. Some very funny, but...
Discovered way back I am a 2nd cousin of Cleese, once removed. My maternal family, Eva, from Cornwall; one of their scions married a Cheese in Bristol way back. John's father changed their name from Cheese to Cleese as he was so pissed off with having the mickey taken out of him
Said Eva was a blacksmith in a tin mine near Camborne. On his bike at 16, lived and married in Bristol where he found a vey successful foundry then an engineering firm, which he later sold off.
I have my Grandfather's (his son) marriage certificate- Manchester Parish Church, aka Manchester Cathedral. My Great Grandfather's profession was listed as
It's always been clear to me that the Headmaster (and Hartopp and Gillett) was fundamentally conservative, recognising the importance of allowing the risky and imperfect flourishing of society's greatness via Stalky, while the priggish socialists Prout and King wanted to quash it. For them, risk and imperfection were intolerable. Sergeant Fox, loyal to authority, could be persuaded both ways.
Spot on, as usual. The fundamental mismatch between what socialism/communism prescribes and reality is why far-left regimes descend into violence. Every time. This started in the Jacobin Terror and has recurred with blood-soaked monotony ever since. When utopia turns out to not be very utopian it is the people’s fault and those in charge, full of rhetoric about being for the people, use ever more violence on the people to make it work. Except the underlying premises are spectacularly wrong and the violence only escalates. I fear for the country as 2TK hacks away to fit Britain to his Procrustean bed.
Out of the ball park, once again, David. These are the "slaves to the plan" that Ted Hughes talks about in "Myth and Education." I have often thought of HR being a prime example of this problem. What you're describing sounds like HR was just elected to government, and everyone has just been put on notice because there are about to be some big changes... and no hanky panky will be tolerated; no fraternising around the water cooler; your cubicle will be monitored; more than 2 toilet breaks before lunch will require a requisition...
Yes, the common link here is that HR people, and modern politicians, have a managerial ethos. They want oversight of everything. Not so they can actually help - but so they can manage, for its own sake.
As far as I can see all dictators gave their people a sweetener - full employment or trains running on time, national pride, housing, successful economy etc
These contemporary dictators attempt none of these carrots. They just focus on the stick.
That will be their undoing.
What we have going for us is the level of gross incompetence at all levels of ‘government’.
That combined with their intransigence will be their undoing.
They are not competent, intelligent or effective dictators
Talking to a man of system as i do fairly regularly, I'm thankful he doesn't get to make any big decisons for other people. For example he believes authoritarianism would and should solve Britains pathetic infastructure progress - i.e. we need more and more pages and consultations. Everyone should read TMS, and C.S. Lewis Abolition of man, though!
I'm afraid I see little evidence there will be a large scale backlash from a public almost totally convinced the recent rioting was down to 'far right misinformation'. The general population tend to object to things they don't like at first and then settle into acceptance. This was demonstrated by large numbers of football fans originally booing players taking the knee, latterly barely noticing. What that means however, is there is only a relatively small number of people to overcome. The problem is, they hold a vice grip on every institution and centre of power in Britain. Don't rely on the public to help, they just want their Netflix accounts to work. Victory will occur, if it ever does, through the undermining of every single institution in the country by a small number of politically engaged activists with skill, perseverance and patience. I hope they reveal themselves before there is nothing left to save.
I suspect the majority of the British public will simply suck up all the crap this government will heap on them - all the failed NetZero energy policies, all the ULEZ 20mph electric car nonsense, all the Look-Another-Deadly-Virus propaganda, all the social media clampdowns and arrests, all the men pretending to be women, all the thousands of fighting-age young Muslims arriving illegally and being fed, housed and cared for for free. The British public will mutter to itself very quietly because its children have already been indoctrinated, its friends have already been warned about hate speech, its employers have already issued DEI training schemes, its savings accounts and mortgages have already been made impossible. It's not a very British (and I think I probably mean English) thing to kick up a fuss about anything really and, on the odd occasion they do, they are ignored so why bother?
Will our descendants see this period as the failure of democracy, first dissolving into centrally planned socialism, and eventually replaced by a new king and kingdom?
I’ve read this twice and think this analysis of Labour’s performance so far excellent. It will be interesting to see how Starmer copes with unscripted questions in the House of Commons after summer recess ends, because not every MP will accept his technocratic ideology and it might get quite heated!
Thanks for this. Yes - this is a good observation. Starmer revealed his true character in his irritable response when the audience laughed at his 'my father was a toolmaker' line during that TV interview during the election campaign. He has no sense of humour and he doesn't like his inflated sense of self-importance being punctured. This will also come out in the Commons.
There was an example of that 'heat' in the HoC ( yesterday?) when James Cleverly took Cooper Balls to task over her statement about the 'riots' following the murders in Southport. She said it was disgusting that people were being attacked because of the colour of their skin and the perpetrators would be dealt with promptly ( words to that effect), and Cleverly, on the subject of 2 tier policing, reminded her about Labour's stance on the BLM rioting protestors, and the police injured at the time. Her mouth pursed thinly and she shook her head!
It seems that the technocratic hydra ( of a government) is not bothered by perception, but only the deliverance of the state of things they purport must come to pass.
Perception is an important facet of governing because it is about sensing, being aware of what, eg, the mood of the nation is, or, eg, the impact of the behaviour of a PM or a Cabinet member, it is about listening and seeing what government policies 'sit well' with the electorate.
How many more instances of this paucity of perception will be raised in the Commons in the 4 to 5 long years ahead. It is not to say the Tory technocrats were perceptive!
It does seem to be the mark of technocracy....it is 'inanimate', it has its 'spreadsheets', it has its targets and outcomes, which appear to be delivered without regard to perception, or whether these outcomes are fair and just. Starmer has technocracy running through his veins....no humour, nor humanity, just 'purpose'.
I thought that this is a powerful article, full of insight.
My suggestion is that there is also another turmoil roiling at the heart of Starmer & Co, intensifying their emotions. Starmer may be Prime Minister but in his heart he is Head Prefect. He assumes the authority of the 'Masters' far away in the Staff Common Room. Therefore he cannot do anything else but follow their distant requirements. Net Zero is beloved not because it 'makes sense' but because the belief in it is required by those above him. The backtracking on Brexit is not because it 'makes sense' but because because the Masters in the Brussels Tea Room expect it. Free speech is being fiercely suppressed because the School Rules demand no speaking in the corridors. The 'older pupils' in the Upper Sixth have privileges (like the Winter fuel allowance) that he doesn't think they deserve.
Starmer's minionhood must rankle, especially when his 'support' depends upon the school administration (the Blob) and the rough boys and girls in the 'Left' house.
Great point. Very astute.
Yes. Off topic, I have made two F oI requests to Number 10
1. To list the "Far Right" groups in the recent troubles
2. To list the business positions and responsibilities of the Cabinet members.
Ha!
Superb! (as usual)
"People of astonishing intellectual narrowness and superficiality" - so true that it makes me become Basil Fawlty deranged that they nevertheless have free rein to wreck my country, with "ankle deep support" as you so aptly describe it.
The chess pieces which come to life in Alice through the Looking Glass are a perfect example of the Adam Smith reference - ‘arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chess–board’, he soon finds that the chess-pieces in fact have wills of their own, and resolutely refuse to stay put in the arrangement he sets out for them.
We are living through the Looking Glass indeed.
Correct. And I would refer readers to this excellent article in the Daily Sceptic, which notes how appallingly Starmer has reckoned the mood of the country; indeed, so badly that all he can do is double down.
Sir Keir Cromwell, who, if he could, would ban everything we do together for fun.
https://dailysceptic.org/2024/09/02/starmers-bid-for-total-power-has-failed/
A truly excellent, thoughtful analysis. Thanks
Thanks!
And the Basil Fawlty reference! I still remember rolling around on the floor laughing (pre rofl era) at that episode. It is only slightly on the caricature side of the real-life, awful technocratic authoritarians you discuss, but oh so close!
Fawlty Towers still funny, even funnier if you can find the unexpurgated versions. Monty Python, not so. Some very funny, but...
Discovered way back I am a 2nd cousin of Cleese, once removed. My maternal family, Eva, from Cornwall; one of their scions married a Cheese in Bristol way back. John's father changed their name from Cheese to Cleese as he was so pissed off with having the mickey taken out of him
Said Eva was a blacksmith in a tin mine near Camborne. On his bike at 16, lived and married in Bristol where he found a vey successful foundry then an engineering firm, which he later sold off.
I have my Grandfather's (his son) marriage certificate- Manchester Parish Church, aka Manchester Cathedral. My Great Grandfather's profession was listed as
"Gentleman".
Sadly, I never met him.
I was thinking of Mr King in "Stalky and Co".
It's always been clear to me that the Headmaster (and Hartopp and Gillett) was fundamentally conservative, recognising the importance of allowing the risky and imperfect flourishing of society's greatness via Stalky, while the priggish socialists Prout and King wanted to quash it. For them, risk and imperfection were intolerable. Sergeant Fox, loyal to authority, could be persuaded both ways.
A brilliantly clever book.
Spot on, as usual. The fundamental mismatch between what socialism/communism prescribes and reality is why far-left regimes descend into violence. Every time. This started in the Jacobin Terror and has recurred with blood-soaked monotony ever since. When utopia turns out to not be very utopian it is the people’s fault and those in charge, full of rhetoric about being for the people, use ever more violence on the people to make it work. Except the underlying premises are spectacularly wrong and the violence only escalates. I fear for the country as 2TK hacks away to fit Britain to his Procrustean bed.
Out of the ball park, once again, David. These are the "slaves to the plan" that Ted Hughes talks about in "Myth and Education." I have often thought of HR being a prime example of this problem. What you're describing sounds like HR was just elected to government, and everyone has just been put on notice because there are about to be some big changes... and no hanky panky will be tolerated; no fraternising around the water cooler; your cubicle will be monitored; more than 2 toilet breaks before lunch will require a requisition...
Love the Fawlty reference.
Yes, the common link here is that HR people, and modern politicians, have a managerial ethos. They want oversight of everything. Not so they can actually help - but so they can manage, for its own sake.
Brecht had something to say on the subject
Yes, regardless he was a Marxist c**t who got his silk shirts tailored in Milan...
Excellent.
As far as I can see all dictators gave their people a sweetener - full employment or trains running on time, national pride, housing, successful economy etc
These contemporary dictators attempt none of these carrots. They just focus on the stick.
That will be their undoing.
What we have going for us is the level of gross incompetence at all levels of ‘government’.
That combined with their intransigence will be their undoing.
They are not competent, intelligent or effective dictators
This is exceptional, thank you
Talking to a man of system as i do fairly regularly, I'm thankful he doesn't get to make any big decisons for other people. For example he believes authoritarianism would and should solve Britains pathetic infastructure progress - i.e. we need more and more pages and consultations. Everyone should read TMS, and C.S. Lewis Abolition of man, though!
I am completely surrounded by men and women of system. This is why I appreciate Smith’s observations!
Excellent
I'm afraid I see little evidence there will be a large scale backlash from a public almost totally convinced the recent rioting was down to 'far right misinformation'. The general population tend to object to things they don't like at first and then settle into acceptance. This was demonstrated by large numbers of football fans originally booing players taking the knee, latterly barely noticing. What that means however, is there is only a relatively small number of people to overcome. The problem is, they hold a vice grip on every institution and centre of power in Britain. Don't rely on the public to help, they just want their Netflix accounts to work. Victory will occur, if it ever does, through the undermining of every single institution in the country by a small number of politically engaged activists with skill, perseverance and patience. I hope they reveal themselves before there is nothing left to save.
I suspect the majority of the British public will simply suck up all the crap this government will heap on them - all the failed NetZero energy policies, all the ULEZ 20mph electric car nonsense, all the Look-Another-Deadly-Virus propaganda, all the social media clampdowns and arrests, all the men pretending to be women, all the thousands of fighting-age young Muslims arriving illegally and being fed, housed and cared for for free. The British public will mutter to itself very quietly because its children have already been indoctrinated, its friends have already been warned about hate speech, its employers have already issued DEI training schemes, its savings accounts and mortgages have already been made impossible. It's not a very British (and I think I probably mean English) thing to kick up a fuss about anything really and, on the odd occasion they do, they are ignored so why bother?
Will our descendants see this period as the failure of democracy, first dissolving into centrally planned socialism, and eventually replaced by a new king and kingdom?
The monarchy is just as corrupt & incompetent as ‘His Majesty’s Government’.