Wednesday, April 07, 2010

The great charade

As always Gerald Warner hits the spot, echoing precisely the sentiment in my previous post. In the course of the campaign, he writes:

... many people will be dismayed to see formerly stern critics of the Cameronian Party succumb to the dog-whistle of tribal loyalty and announce themselves as reluctant Tory voters. Such reversions to historic allegiance are not, as some will heatedly complain, "betrayal": they are simply the consequence of mounting a critique that was not underpinned by any fundamental and consistent political philosophy.

David Cameron is not "the least worst option": he is the worst possible option. His victory would condemn the Conservative Party to ideological death; his defeat would offer some prospect of restoring it. No government can totally destroy a nation so long as there is a virile and principled opposition. That has ceased to be the case in Britain. Among the major parties we now have the pseudo-choice that was on offer in some of the Soviet satellite states where people could vote for the Communist Party or for some "Peasant People's Party" that was a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Reds.
There are the sheeple, who will get caught up in this charade, and then there are people who can think for themselves. The whole point of the general election campaign is to convince you that the politicians actually give a toss about what you think – all so that you will go trotting obediently into the polls and give them your vote.

Gerald offers the obvious and necessary antidote. We do not have to choose between their lies. We can reject them altogether.