Blair I suspect is a scapegoat for the theories of modern governence floating around at the time that were all about subjugating governence to a simple market forces model. At least the non-war political decisions reflect that. As does the decisions of our aussie government, which of course blindly follow the pathbreakers in the US. Unfortunately the model failed badly in Russia, Iraq and now we see Britain crumbling. How much longer before Aus and the US too?
Thankfully some well-respected people (including some of those who argued for it initially) are now speaking out against it and there is hope for change.
As for Blair's aggressive war stance, well I do believe he thought an interventionist strategy was a good path to take. America's rampage though pushed the credibility of whatever reasons he had for his initial deployments in Europe out the door.
Whatever his reasons were, I dont believe we've found a way yet to resolve what it means to fight for freedom of our liberties or in fact to know exactly what those liberties are. Too often it ends in revolution, or oppression, or a hypocritical curbing of our freedoms in some areas to protect our freedoms in others. I do know that any country that starts claiming to have the ultimate model and goes to war to spread that model is inevitably flawed. Thats simple people psychology. Cold war communist countries and America/Britain aren't too different in that regard.
Governence in western countries for the last 20 years has been an interesting experiment, but i do believe that it will ultimately fail as humans cannot flourish in such a selfishly ruthless and mechanical environment. Blair's government is just showing the first signs of the system cracking.
1 comment:
Blair I suspect is a scapegoat for the theories of modern governence floating around at the time that were all about subjugating governence to a simple market forces model. At least the non-war political decisions reflect that. As does the decisions of our aussie government, which of course blindly follow the pathbreakers in the US. Unfortunately the model failed badly in Russia, Iraq and now we see Britain crumbling. How much longer before Aus and the US too?
Thankfully some well-respected people (including some of those who argued for it initially) are now speaking out against it and there is hope for change.
As for Blair's aggressive war stance, well I do believe he thought an interventionist strategy was a good path to take. America's rampage though pushed the credibility of whatever reasons he had for his initial deployments in Europe out the door.
Whatever his reasons were, I dont believe we've found a way yet to resolve what it means to fight for freedom of our liberties or in fact to know exactly what those liberties are. Too often it ends in revolution, or oppression, or a hypocritical curbing of our freedoms in some areas to protect our freedoms in others. I do know that any country that starts claiming to have the ultimate model and goes to war to spread that model is inevitably flawed. Thats simple people psychology. Cold war communist countries and America/Britain aren't too different in that regard.
Governence in western countries for the last 20 years has been an interesting experiment, but i do believe that it will ultimately fail as humans cannot flourish in such a selfishly ruthless and mechanical environment. Blair's government is just showing the first signs of the system cracking.
Post a Comment