No Comparison Between British Tories and American Conservatives
By 1997 the party was plagued by infighting and allegations of “sleaze,” and the rebranded Labor Party won not because Britain rejected conservatism, but because it had a young, optimistic, and charismatic leader in Tony Blair. Blair essentially promised to implement conservative policies with a kinder, gentler touch. A succession of disastrous choices of leader, combined with ongoing factionalism, ensured that the Conservatives remained in the political wilderness until they found their own Blair in the shape of Cameron.
The anger, shouting, arrogance, and xenophobia which Applebaum claims marked the last two Tory election campaigns exist mostly in her imagination; to the contrary, the Conservatives in opposition lacked self-belief and passion. And by xenophobia, she is presumably referring to Tory promises to claw back powers from the European Union and put a stop to uncontrolled mass immigration. On both issues the Conservatives were, and still are, in tune with clear majorities of the public, but Europe and immigration weren’t priorities amid the economic boom of the Blair years.
“Above all,” Applebaum says of the Conservatives, “they changed the way they spoke.” True, Conservatives talk of Cameron having “decontaminated the brand,”‘ but only because the party allowed itself to be caricatured as at best mean and at worst the devil incarnate. It’s a caricature which Applebaum embraces just as shamelessly as she and Frum embrace similar caricatures of tea partiers and talk radio audiences in the U.S.
The Conservatives have remained out of power in part because they couldn’t get their act together and in part because New Labor didn’t screw up. But the main reason is because between them, Thatcher and Blair brought the British people to a consensus: we basically accepted the idea of a free-market economy co-existing alongside a large welfare state.
Cameron is now making noises about replacing “big government” with a “big society,” but whoever wins the election, they’ll have no option but to implement massive cuts in the public services; the real objection to the size of the state in Britain isn’t philosophical, it’s financial. (For more on the worst-case scenario facing Britain see this article by Richard Fernandez)
Contrary to what Applebaum, who describes herself as “a fully paid-up member of the mushy political center,” would like U.S. conservatives to believe, the contrast between the current British and American political scenes could not be more dramatic. In America, what could be a defining battle between statism and individual freedom is just getting started. And while in Britain there’s little difference between the parties, the differences between Republicans and Democrats have never been starker.
Applebaum writes: “The history of the Tories shows that if by exciting your base you lose the center, then you lose the next election too.” Leaving aside the fact the she’s comparing apples to oranges, it seems as if commentators like Applebaum and Frum are living in what we might call a pre-3/23 world. They obsess about “the base” and “the center,” but on the day Obama signed the health care bill into law, against the wishes of a majority of the American people, such distinctions lost much of their meaning. Increasingly, you’re either for Obama and his agenda, or you’re against him.
And Applebaum apparently hasn’t been looking at the polls. Obama’s approval ratings are in the tank. The Democrats’ favorability ratings are at an all-time low. The GOP is enjoying leads on the congressional ballot that are virtually unprecedented. Maybe she also missed the elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts.
Why at this stage would Republicans want to change the way they speak? As it happens, mainstream political opposition to Obama, Pelosi, and Reid has been remarkably civil, given what’s at stake, but if you can’t get angry at the prospect of your country being irreversibly damaged by the most arrogant, incompetent, and out-of-touch president and Congress in history, when can you get angry? This is no time for mushy centerism and rebranding exercises. America needs the conservatism of Thatcher, not Cameron.
Absolutely correct. Cameron is well on the way to losing what should have been a landslide victory for the Conservatives. He’s snatching defeat from the jaws of victory: Precisely because the Conservatives misread the situation, and imagined that people were fed-up with right-wing Conservatism. They failed to understand that Blair had simply stolen the clothes of the Conservatives. So, after losing three elections to the socialists (now masquerading as “New” Labour), what do the Conservatives do? Make a touchy-feely liberal their leader, in the hope of becoming more acceptable to the politically-correct media. End result? The Conservatives are about to lose an election which they should have won easily. And that of course is exactly what lefties like Ann Applebaum want to do to the Republicans in America.
Sounds a lot like the type of Republicans who think that McCain was a good candidate.
Your typical liberal American is most likely in the same basic belief system as your typical UK or European citizen. The reason is that since WWII there has been a steady drift toward the nanny state and the exchange of personal freedom for some notion of security and state supported benefits. For Brits this is an article of faith. They want their benefits and will sell their poor souls to any politician who will provide them. They believe strongly in the National Health Care system which is exactly where we do not want to go. If you want to see what hell looks like, take a hard look at the NHS. Big, unwieldy, inefficient, un-caring, out of control and providing a third world standard of health care to a population seemingly unable to “get it”. They are also the largesst employer and biggest voting bloc in the UK which explains their sway over the people. Finally the European media is liberal to the core and forms a tight tent with 100% control over the propaganda machine. Enough said. We do not want any thing to do with European “conservatives.”
Indeed a great article !
I remember of almost getting lynched by joking to Brits that the Tories were a ”centre-left” party.
There is nothing the GOP can learn from Cameron, from what he showed from the debate, he not trying to show leadership but to look acceptable at the eyes of the Brits.
All the British left reaction about Cameron ”right-wing extremism” is just fear scaremongering and a failed attempt to not recognise that Tory and Labour agree on the essentials.
But there one name that make the left-wing go crazy and feint, which is a good signal : Margaret Thatcher !
Sure GB and the world have changed, but the fundamentals of Freedom never changed and the narrative can be updated.
It is funny that the only right-wing party would be the UKIP, since they are in the great left tradition, accused of Racism …
How does that old saw go? If the voters have to choose between an imitation left-wing candidate and the real thing—they will pick the real one every time. David Cameron is simply a British version of George Bush 21 and John McCain.
They don’t call Dave Cameron the “Heir to Blair” for nothing. Yes, he has piddled away what was once a devastating lead over collapsing Labour and the hated Brown by moving to Appelbaum’s “mushy center,” rather than giving the electorate what they crave: a true hard-arsed Thatcherite.
“the most arrogant, incompetent, and out-of-touch president and Congress in history”
That was President George W Bush (2001-2009).
The “mushy” middle doesn’t like conflict, so when the side who has been quiet suddenly gets loud, the middle is discomfited and seeks a return to normalcy. This normalcy consists of loud leftists constantly agitating for more statism met by conservatives with no passion who make polite and effete technical arguments against the left’s demands. The winner is the left, who gets incremental change in its direction, because the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
So what if conflict makes anyone uncomfortable? They are not going to go leftist just because they don’t like all the yelling. Let them complain. We will call their bluff. They will eventually side with us.
I guess Daniel Hannan knew how to read the tea leaves on this election, which is why he nominally supported Cameron but did not run himself for MP.
Let’s face it, if the Tories are going to win with a Thatcherite, you might as well go with the best known and most eloquent one, and that’s Daniel.
My question to you, Eric, is this: what is going to be left of Great Britain? For, what will happen in the interval between May 6, and whenever the next election will be?
Fewer banks? Or will they be nationalized, thereby kicking the can further down
the road and resulting in a bigger mess to be cleaned up.
I really wonder when was the last time AA, and the rest of the salon set, really
went out to see what was going on, instead of seeing how the rest of the world conform to what they say ought to be the case.
Plus, I notice that AA had nothing to say about disaffected Tories joining the UKIP party.
AA is about as reliable as a sundial, when it is midnight, and no stars can be seen because of the cloud cover, and no artificial light either.
Over here in Canada, there were some short ditties. One was, “Liberal, Tory, same old story”. Another way, “Tory, Grit, same old _____”.
One joke was: What is the difference between the Tories and the Liberals? Answer – who their lawyers are on Bay Street.
As long as AA, and the rest of the salon, want the appearance of diversity, but
in fact prefer a monolithic political spectrum; they will have to deal with the accusation that they are very much like the Ring-wraiths, or Nazgul, of “The Lord of the Rings” by Tolkien, or the 3 movies with that title.
I listened to the UK “debate” last night — it was on Fox News late. What an eye-opener — a pathetic display really. Mr.Cameron is about as conservative as David Frum — i.e., NOT.
It was a comedic display of three politicians all trying all try to out politically correct the others and all tying to claim almost exactly the same ground. Why bother?
IMO, the only real difference between them was the color of their ties.