The Curmudgeon

YOU'LL COME FOR THE CURSES. YOU'LL STAY FOR THE MUDGEONRY.

Monday, February 27, 2006

Liberty, Security, Modernity

The Vicar of Downing Street has managed to place a brief sermon in the Observer. It seems that a charge of authoritarianism (against, of all people, Tony) has been "crafted by parts of the right wing" and is now being "taken up by parts of the left". The reason for this is that "New Labour has eschewed traditional forms of leftist statism" - all that rubbish about governing from the centre by ministerial fiat, presumably.

"At one level," says Tony, "the charge is easy to debunk." Tony proceeds to do just that, citing the Human Rights Act which he has so happily circumvented, and the Freedom of Information Act which is, in Tony's lapidary phrasing, "the most open thing any British government has done since the Reform Acts of the 1830s". The Freedom of Information Act means we know more than ever about whatever the Government chooses to tell us; the Human Rights Act means that "for the first time, a citizen can challenge the power of the state solely on the basis of an infringement of human rights", so long as that citizen can afford the time and expense involved in taking the Government to court. "I have," Tony concludes, "given away more prime ministerial power than any predecessor for more than 100 years." Tony says it, so it must be true.

Tony continues: "As for parliament, I have spent proportionately more time answering questions than any predecessor" and "given more statements". He is also the only Prime Minister to give monthly press conferences. Authoritarians are, of course, well known for their pathological unwillingness to make their own views known to lesser mortals. Tony is "the only PM ever to agree to appear before the select committee chairs"; in an authoritarian state, of course, Tony would not have had the choice. And, lest we forget: from the perilous precipice of a hundred-plus House of Commons majority, "I gave a vote specifically on whether to go to war." One virtually swoons at the non-authoritarianism of it all.

Tony then proceeds to the issue of ID cards and "anti-terrorism" legislation. In these cases, it is not that Tony is attacking liberty, but that liberty is an irrelevance: "For me, this is not an issue of liberty but of modernity". Tony is "hard on behaviour, but soft on lifestyle"; a person's lifestyle and behaviour being two completely different things. Tony believes in "live and let live, except where your behaviour harms the freedom of others" to live in a way of which Tony would approve. Terrorism is a case in point: "while I completely condemn IRA terrorism, I believe it was different in nature and scale from the new global Islamic terrorism we face." Tony believes, so his measures must be right. If we believe in Tony, we shall be right also.

Similarly, "antisocial behaviour isn't susceptible to normal court process"; perhaps because Tony has removed the courts from the equation. "Organisations that support terrorism take enormous care to avoid infringing the strict letter of the law." Clearly, the strict letter of the law does not prohibit giving money, shelter or training to terrorists, otherwise we would not have had the July bombings last year. "People should be prevented from glorifying terrorism. You can say it is a breach of the right to free speech but in the real world, people get hurt when organisations encourage hatred" - far more people than get hurt when governments lie their countries into war. Tony's devolution of the police into a centralised agency will "make it difficult for criminals to do business", while on ID cards "there is a host of arguments, irrespective of security, why their time has come"; which appears to settle the matter. "And, contrary to what is said, it will not be an offence not to carry one", although since Tony believes the time has come, no doubt it will be increasingly inconvenient. After all, those parts of the right wing and their left-wing fellow travellers have an attitude to liberty which indicates "a refusal to understand the modern world". Since Tony's policies are actually "not destroying our liberties, but protecting them", perhaps it is time to consider whether such wilful backsliding can, in a modern democracy, be tolerated.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home