Skip to main content

"So farewell then" 2006

It is pretty hard to avoid sounding demi E.J Thribb when saying goodbye to a year.

Politically it has been slightly inconclusive- although the Conservatives have advanced, it does not, as yet, seem enough to give them the chance to win outright, come the next election. Labour seem more becalmed than in actually stormy water, and while the Lib Dems have had a generally poor year, the party is at least becoming more coherent and although polls have been generally down, in local government by-elections, the Lib Dems have achieved considerable success. However, I think no party can look at 2006 with unalloyed satisfaction.

So from the perspective of Liberalism, some progress inside the party, but a generally poor press and falling polls have clearly hurt. Many of our political enemies would like to write off the chances of the Lib Dems- well, the world is littered with the bones of predictions that never happened. The only thing that I can do is to campaign for the core principles that this blog espouses. I believe that we are winning the argument. I also believe that unless the idea of freedom is explicitly incorporated into policy formation, then our society risks blundering in some very dangerous directions.

Another key area for those who advocate strict limits to the state: privacy, is also set to rise up the political agenda. Already I detect a backlash against the snooping state- and, for example, as more DNA is kept on record, the risks of intrusion increase.

Despite the mushiness of both the Labour and Conservative intellectual platforms, I believe that the electorate is seeking a more crunchy style of politics- I hope that the Liberal Democrats can provide it. 2007 may well be the year that we finally see whether the political pendulum will come our way, or whether we have to endure another dead end government.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Cicero cut andre-pasted for you. Lepidus...


Anonymous said...
My dear Consul I am flattered. The last time you got so worked up was over that Chap Catiline. Not having as much time as you I will have to reply in two parts the first shorter the "low" politics as you quaintly put it and second ly in a later post the loft ideals you go on about. B4 I began though if you have'nt had a look at last week's Economist article I referred to on Polish highlanders, do so your take would be worth hearing.

It is indisputably the case the Tories are on the up. Their vote share will increase and they will highly likely take votes and seats from the Lib Dems. However barring extraordinary events no one really believes more than 15 Lib Dem MPs at most will seriously be under threat anyway. That leaves a baseline of 47 MPs at the minimum probably a few more.

So why do Tory votes matter well take two case studies. Manchester Withington probably the most extraordinary Lib Dem result of all time. Bigger swings have been achieved but really only in By-Elections. Tory vote drops by a third, John Leech elected. Take two Islington South close marginal, Lib Dem vote rises but so does the Tory vote! result Emily Thornberry MP. That is is why Withington was won and IS not. There are scores of seats up the Country where Labour's machine has atrophied with decent Tory votes but with the Lib Dems having surged into second. The Tory votes in such seats will indisputably be key as to your seat count. I bet Lord Rennard thinks so. Agree do you not.......


More Later.


Lepidus,

1:42 PM

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...