Skip to main content

Fellow Travelers and Useful Idiots

Sometimes I wonder whether Mary Dejevsky is not actually in the pay of the Kremlin lie factory.

Pieces like her latest in The Independent leave me open mouthed. The idea that Britain is in some way responsible for Kremlin sanctioned murders in London, "because we give asylum to the Kremlin's enemies" is simply despicable. The special pleading she makes for the Kremlin is reminiscent of the most lick spittle Communist fellow traveller. The fact is that Russian agents were sent from Moscow to kill in broad daylight, and with scant regard for the well-being of any innocents who might have got in the way.

Then again, she actually supports authoritarianism- her piece in January was nothing short of disgraceful.


Anonymous said…

You do not support Authoritianism but is your position on Russia's past too different even if you reach different conclusions. You believe Russia has never had anything other than a tradition of absolutist autocracy until 15 years ago. As awful as Putin is in your eyes the handover from Yeltsin was the first non violent handover of power from one Russian ruler to the next in History never mind where the previous incumbent gets to spend the rest of his days peacefully.

I suggest you read the current Economist. It's clear some kind of transition is under way. I think it is the transition to Medvedev. True it's gradual and I'm sure you will rant Putin will stay as the real power and yet Cicero had he wanted he could have done anything third term life term whatever he didn't. So perhaps despite the arselikhan of Dejevsky you might reconsider Russia as well. Imperfect often extremely violent by Western standards but it still looks favourable next to Central Asia or China.

Andy Cooke said…
God, what an unpleasant article by Dejevsky. Is she really saying that a sovereign nation is justified in painfully murdering refugees from hiding in other nations?
As for that piece in January - someone should remind her that "Benevolent" and "authoritarianism" tend not to get along very well.
(And who's to define the merit in her "meritocracy"? Could it be merit that she'd approve of? In which case her argument simplifies to: "The best Government would be a Government made up of people I'd approve of, that the people can't throw out, with ultimate power over every aspect of their lives".
What a seriously unpleasant stance of hers.

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and

We need to talk about UK corruption

After a long hiatus, mostly to do with indolence and partly to do with the general election campaign, I feel compelled to take up the metaphorical pen and make a few comments on where I see the situation of the UK in the aftermath of the "Brexit election". OK, so we lost.  We can blame many reasons, though fundamentally the Conservatives refused to make the mistakes of 2017 and Labour and especially the Liberal Democrats made every mistake that could be made.  Indeed the biggest mistake of all was allowing Johnson to hold the election at all, when another six months would probably have eaten the Conservative Party alive.  It was Jo Swinson's first, but perhaps most critical, mistake to make, and from it came all the others.  The flow of defectors and money persuaded the Liberal Democrat bunker that an election could only be better for the Lib Dems, and as far as votes were concerned, the party did indeed increase its vote by 1.3 million.   BUT, and it really is the bi

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo