Blithering Bunny points out some politically parochial comments by Peter Jay, former Economics Editor of the BBC. Can he really think that “…there are for all practical purposes no conservative ‘have-nots.'”? Or that “Conservatism is not and can never be a philosophy”? Given Jay’s eminence I would have thought better of him. The title of his review, which I stole for this post, would apply to its writer.
I’m trying to work out if the fact that Jay used to be married to a Prime Minister’s daughter who is now Baroness Jay is relevant. Actually, that is a fib. I’m really trying to work out something funny but not too mean to say about it – and failing.
Peter Jay: “There is no sadder creature than a conservative intellectual… Conservatism is not and can never be a philosophy; its foundations lie not in reason, but in self-interest.”
Of course, the truth is that most public intellectuals of a non- socialist persuasion would more accurately be described as ‘liberal’ thinkers – those who accept market based solutions; in preference to those from secret State appointed committees.
Some liberal thinkers might be conservative. I suspect the great majority are not. Notwithstanding this, the most common reference to the term ‘conservative’, as it applies to people, invariably comes from BBC civil servants (like Peter Jay), who regularly, and it must be said, quite successfully, attempt to mischaracterise (i.e. label) any interviewee suspected of not following the agreed collective line.
In other words, at the BBC they will only fight a war that they know is won before it commences.
There is a difference to my mind between conservatives and democrats. Conaservatives don’t necessarily have any attachment to democratic government and equal application of the law.
OFF MESSAGE –
This site tends obviously to concentrate on the news output from the BBC but I was struck by the
anti-Jewish tone of its programme “Spooks”. This really could have been co-scripted by Goebels. It were very much in the world of shadowy Jewish conspiracies, manipulation of naive Aryan girl, the lascivious Jew, Jewish control of the media etc etc.
Israel was simply assumed to be a pariah – “not all Israelis are bad”.
David
Latest BBC Bias.
“The first votes have already been cast and counted in a tiny New Hampshire district – delivering President Bush his first victory”
Note: the word “tiny”, undermining Bush’s victory.
Well, if your quote is correct, then it is the district that is being referred to – not the scale of the victory – at least that’s how it reads to me.
The same story was mentioned on Sky News – assuming its the same place (the details do seem to match) – it’s a place called Dixville Notch (not as quaint as my favourite US placename – Big Bone Lick!) – with 27 votes cast – 19 for Bush, 8 for Kerry – so, all in all, a resounding Bush victory – but in a tiny district all the same đŸ™‚
Here’s a link to the full details, courtesy of Xinhua, the official mouthpiece of the People’s Republic of China… http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2004-11/02/content_2169669.htm
The intellectual basis of conservatism is very simple; people own themselves, their labor and the fruits of that labor. This is capitalism.
In the socialism favored by ‘liberals’ the state owns the individual’s labor and the fruits there-of. ‘From each according to his means, to each according to his needs’ and the enlightened elite decide what those means and what those needs are. This of course is why it is so favored by the chattering classes. They see themselves as the benign rulers and the rest of us as their worshipful peons.
“every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good.”
Of course no-one has heard of Adam Smith and EVERYONE knows Peter Jay!
Adam Smith talking about the BBC eh?
“..being the managers of other people’s money than of their own, it cannot well be expected that they should watch over it with the same anxious vigilance with which partners in a private copartnery frequently watch over their own. Like the stewards of a rich man, they … consider attention to small matters as not for their master’s honour and very easily give themselves a dispensation from having it.”
I’ve just remembered that my copy of Milton Friedman’s “Free to Choose” (published in 1980) has the following quote on the cover:
‘”Friedmanism” has become a central – perhaps the central – issue in British domestic political debate’ – PETER JAY.
Mind you, Jay doesn’t say that he likes it, only that it is central.
Hasn’t the BBC US election coverage been awful tonight ? Completely outshone by ITN.
Yes – the Beeb’s Dimblebore coverage has been quite turgid. ITV’s studio discussion was insightful with Bob Worcester of MORI and another couple of interesting commentators (until GMTV came on – although John Stapleton is reasonable enough), meanwhile Sky News’ has been worth keeping an eye on too for their correspondents on the spot.
Matt Frei was looking a bit choked on BBC Breakfast Time thos morning though I thought!
Conservatism is not and can never be a philosophy; its foundations lie not in reason, but in self-interest.
We all know that the philosophies behind socialism lies in reason don’t we. Thats why its a disaster every time and in whatever way it is tried.
He obviously thinks that unionised workers vote labour out of a belief in the philosophy of redistribution rather than the belief that they can have more wages. All politics is self interest.
This is why I hate lefties, you can never argue with them because they sneer rather than discuss. They also try to complicate simple matters so as to stop an argument.
The fact that we are paying pricks like this to insult us is infuriating.
“The fact that we are paying pricks like this to insult us is infuriating.”
We are forced to pay these pricks on the threat of jail. Now that’s infuriating!