Tuesday 29 March 2005

Flight into danger

Back on 14th December I wrote that I could no longer vote for the Conservatives because of their support for ID cards. As time went on I began to doubt my decision. It was clear that many Tories had grave misgivings about the ID policy and it seemed possible that this mistake might be reversed. Then another factor came into play: What if Tony Blair kept his job because of me? Imagine it’s around May 8th and the 34th recount has been held at Edinburgh Southwest. The last 16 recounts have all been a tie between Labour and Conservative. A coin is tossed and Alistair Darling wins. Blair is back in power with a majority of one seat all because I abstained! Surely the ultimate nightmare. Of course, the chances of this happening are infinitesimal - but then why vote at all? The answer, I suppose, is that we humans like to be part of the team even if our contribution wasn’t actually necessary for the victory, although when Kilmarnock win the Champions' League I'll know it was because of my support. Whatever happens, I’ll be up all night for the election results and it’s impossible to imagine myself staring at the screen without shouting for and against the various winners, although there is certainly a plausible case for welcoming the defeat of any sitting member. All of which brings me to Howard Flight.

Liberty Cadre (who was at the infamous meeting) draws our attention to this piece in the Telegraph and describes it as “damage control”. That’s the way I read it on the web earlier today, and from the point of view of the Conservative Party’s election campaign Moore’s case makes sense:

MPs hold their seats only because of their party. They wouldn't get elected if it didn't say "Conservative" or "Labour" after their name on the ballot paper, so they must not embarrass it.
If opponents see that the leadership will simply turn on any candidate against whom they can trump up an accusation, they will trump up a lot more. But this is not the question in the case of Howard Flight. The question is, are the Tories serious? Mr Howard's ruthless response shows that they are.

But what of those of us who are, shall I say, a wee bit more ideological?

As always, Sean Gabb has written the best account (Issue Number 132) of the Flight affair. Read and weep:

And they richly deserve their present embarrassment. They are political frauds. By continuing to exist and to show some prospect of being able to win an election, they attract funding and votes from genuinely conservative parties. Yes, this Labour Government is dreadful. Yes, Tony Blair is personally and politically the vilest wretch who ever lied his way into the House of Commons, and his colleagues are a gang of traitors who deserve hanging from the nearest lamp post. But this is not good enough reason for thinking that another Conservative Government would be in our long term national interest. We need to destroy New Labour. Before then, though, we need to destroy the Conservative Party. The Enemy Class media has its own reasons for kicking the Conservatives down. But this media should be regarded in this respect as objectively allied to the forces of conservatism.

I know some of my readers will think my closing sally disrespectful. But I really cannot help myself. The Conservatives have been crucified today. Is it too much to hope they will not be resurrected on the third day?

And that's the problem: I really do want to see Phoney Tony and the Scouse Spouse dragged screaming from Number 10 and strung up near the spot where I made my first political gesture by giving a V-sign to George Brown as he sped past in his ministerial limo on his way to wreck the British economy.

So should I hold my nose and vote Tory? On the other hand, if ten million of us were to go into the ballot box and cross out the name of the Conservative candidate and write in "Howard Flight"...now that would be something, wouldn't it?

1 comment:

David Farrer said...

Comments made on previous template:

David Farrer
How about "Duke of Earl"?

6 April 2005, 22:17:14 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Stuart Dickson
Earl Farrer of Free Whiskyshire. 
Or were you aiming for an entire Dukedom?

6 April 2005, 17:22:24 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

David Farrer
I'm thinking more of a peerage.

6 April 2005, 06:27:44 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Stuart Dickson
Still no word on your own candidacy David?

5 April 2005, 10:03:23 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

David Farrer
If I move to Arundel!

4 April 2005, 21:59:55 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Stuart Dickson
Thank you. 
Independence blog strives for accuracy at all times: 
I am sure that the Scottish National Party will be delighted to know that you are still in the "pool" of persuadable voters.

4 April 2005, 21:28:06 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

David Farrer
That still stands. Who knows what will happen between now and 5th May?

4 April 2005, 11:32:36 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Stuart Dickson
I currently have a wee, bracketed description of each Scottish Political Blog I link to at my Independence blog. Currently beside Freedom and Whisky I have written: 
libertarian right, not voting Tory due to ID cards 
Is that still correct? (I am not going to change the "right" adjective - it is crystal clear to anyone who reads your blog the you are 100% on the right of the political spectrum, despite your recent protestations!) 

2 April 2005, 08:57:11 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Wild Pegasus
Your vote is meaningless. You won't decide the outcome the election, and even if you did, there isn't enough of a difference between the Tories and Labour to make it worth the effort. 
- Josh

1 April 2005, 23:34:27 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Neil Craig
The very best that the Tories could get would be more votes than Labour but fewer seats. 
My best hope is that because Labour are going to easily win on a small minority people will not vote, as they normally do, to keep to keep out ....... & vote for whoever they really like. 
Following which we all put on orange scarves & call for a rerun.

30 March 2005, 19:37:21 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Love your site. Have you seen www.powerisastateofmind.com for a laugh?

30 March 2005, 16:02:06 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Andrew Ian Dodge
If you want a real laugh watch Newsnight's take on the event. Michael Crick made several factual errors in his report. Several of my fellow attendees spent the weekend being bothered by the press about the whole affair. I might point out that Peter was there as well and shares my opinions on the debacle. The irony, of course, is that I rounded on Flight in my post-meeting blog for waffling about tax. Needless to say I was shocked when this entire row started.

30 March 2005, 12:04:43 GMT+01:00
– Like – Reply

Stuart Dickson
So, you are not going to stand up for your beliefs and become the first-ever Scottish Libertarian candidate? 
Fair enough. I suppose that the 500 quid deposit you would lose would be wiser invested in a nice chunk of precious metal.

30 March 2005, 10:14:25 GMT+01:00